Departments: Paper

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what percentage of paper used  (a) for photocopying and  (b) in printed publications by his Office was from recycled sources in each of the last three years.

Peter Hain: In the last three years the Wales Office has used 100 per cent. recycled paper for photocopying and printing, and the paper used in our publications for the last three years have been at least 75 per cent. recycled.

Official Visits

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many days he spent in Wales on official business in each of the last 12 months; and on how many occasions he stayed overnight.

Peter Hain: In the last 12 months I have spent 67 day in Wales in my capacity as Secretary of State for Wales.
	In addition to the time spent in Wales, the Under-Secretary of State and I undertake Wales business in Parliament and in the Wales Office at Gwydyr House in London.

Highways Agency: Vehicles

Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport for what reason the Highways Agency uses four wheel drive vehicles for motorway patrols.

Stephen Ladyman: The Traffic Officer Service is a 24 hour-365 day operation covering all the motorways in England and certain key interlinking trunk roads. Given the nature of the service it is essential that the vehicles which are provided for patrol activities are able to safely operate in adverse weather conditions such as snow and slippery surfaces, hence four wheel drive is considered to be essential. This drive provision also enables the vehicles to be used for certain carriageway clearance operations. There is also a further requirement for a high payload in order to carry the crew, essential kit and, where appropriate, passengers, which means that only vehicles of a particular size can safely be used.

M1

Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will take steps to reduce congestion on the southbound carriageway of the M1 motorway caused by queuing vehicles seeking to exit at junction 19; if he will consider widening the road at this point to create an extra lane; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Ladyman: The Highways Agency is aware of queuing on the M1 southbound approach to Junction 19. A major improvement scheme is programmed which will increase capacity and improve flow at this junction. One of the anticipated benefits will be to eliminate the queuing problem. Preparatory work is in progress and, subject to statutory processes being completed, work on site is expected to begin in February 2009.
	As an interim measure advance warning signs have been installed for safety reasons. There are no plans to widen this section of the M1.

Motor Vehicles: Registration

Greg Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many prosecutions were brought against the keepers of foreign registered vehicles for failing to re-register their vehicle details with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency after six months in each of the last five years.

Stephen Ladyman: There is no current legislation available to the Agency, which allows for the prosecution of keepers of foreign vehicles who have failed to register their vehicles within the required timescales.
	However, if the Agency receives a report recording the sighting of an unlicensed vehicle on the road, the Agency is able to prosecute under the legislation provided by Section 29 VERA. There are practical difficulties with this and unless a name and address of the keeper of the foreign vehicle is provided the Agency is unable to pursue these cases. The Agency is able to utilise other Enforcement action such as the wheel clamping and impounding of a vehicle. Vehicle keepers are required to provide evidence of registration in the UK and licensing before the release of the vehicle. The number of prosecutions of foreign vehicles under this legislation in each of the last five years is not collated.

Children

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many children were in working and non-working households  (a) below 60 per cent. of median income,  (b) in the bottom 20 per cent. of the income distribution and (c) the bottom 30 per cent. of the income distribution in each year since 1994-95.

James Plaskitt: The available information is in the following tables.
	At present, we are unable to provide data for 2005-06 as the Households Below
	Average Income 2005-06 release is currently being revised. The new release will be available from mid-May.
	The Secretary of State made a written statement to Parliament on 23 April 2007,  Official Report, column 20WS on why the statistics are being revised.
	
		
			  (a) Number of children (millions) living in households below 60 per cent. of median income: by working/non-working households: before housing costs 
			   Working households  Non-working households 
			 1994-95 1.3 1.9 
			 1995-96 1.2 1.8 
			 1996-97 1.4 2.0 
			 1997-98 1.6 1.9 
			 1998-99 1.5 1.8 
			 1999-2000 1.5 1.7 
			 2000-01 1.3 1.6 
			 2001-02 1.4 1.6 
			 2002-03 1.4 1.6 
			 2003-04 1.3 1.5 
			 2004-05 1.3 1.4 
		
	
	
		
			  (b) Number of children (millions) living in households below 20 per cent. of income distribution: by working/non-working households: before housing costs 
			   Working households  Non-working households 
			 1994-95 1.4 2.0 
			 1995-96 1.3 2.0 
			 1996-97 1.5 2.0 
			 1997-98 1.6 1.9 
			 1998-99 1.6 1.8 
			 1999-2000 1.6 1.8 
			 2000-01 1.5 1.7 
			 2001-02 1.5 1.7 
			 2002-03 1.6 1.7 
			 2003-04 1.6 1.7 
			 2004-05 1.6 1.6 
		
	
	
		
			  (c) Number of children (millions) living in households below 30 per cent. of income distribution: by working/non-working households: before housing costs 
			   Working households  Non-working households 
			 1994-95 2.3 2.5 
			 1995-96 2.3 2.6 
			 1996-97 2.4 2.5 
			 1997-98 2.6 2.3 
			 1998-99 2.6 2.3 
			 1999-2000 2.6 2.3 
			 2000-01 2.6 2.2 
			 2001-02 2.7 2.1 
			 2002-03 2.8 2.1 
			 2003-04 2.7 2.1 
			 2004-05 2.8 2.0 
			  Notes:  1. The information is for Great Britain up to 2001/02 and for the United Kingdom from 2002-03 onwards.  2. It is based on OECD equivalisation factors and therefore will not be the same as any figures previously published that were based on McClements equivalisation. factors.   Source:  Family Resources Survey

Children: Maintenance

Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether the Child Support Agency uses local authority certificated bailiffs for the collection of arrears of child support payments.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	 Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 26 April 2007:
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether the Child Support Agency uses local authority certificated bailiffs for the collection of arrears of child support payments.
	The Agency's bailiffs are appointed by the county court, not the local authority. As such, the bailiffs used by the Agency are county court certificated, rather than local authority certificated.
	Certificated bailiffs are granted a certificate by a County Court judge which allows them to levy distress for rent. To obtain a certificate, the applicant must satisfy the judge that he is a fit and proper person to hold a certificate, that he has sufficient knowledge of the law of distress, and that he is not in the business of buying debts.
	Further information concerning the certification of bailiffs can be found on the Department for Constitutional Affairs website at the following address:
	http://www.dca.gov.uk/enforcement/enfrev01/repac/htm.
	I hope you find this answer helpful.

Children: Maintenance

Roberta Blackman-Woods: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what action he is taking to speed up execution of arrest warrants in cases of persistent failure to pay child support;
	(2)  what the target time is for the period between the issuance and execution of arrest warrants in cases of persistent failure to pay child support; and what the average time was in the last period for which figures are available.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is the matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the right, hon. Member with the information requested.
	 Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 26 April 2006:
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary for Work and Pensions, what action he is taking to speed up execution of arrest warrants in cases of persistent failure to pay child support.
	and;
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the target time is for the period between the issuance and execution of arrest warrants in cases of persistent failure to pay child support; and what the average time was in the last period for which figures are available.
	The priority for execution of child support warrants is set by each Magistrates' court who will arrange for the execution of warrants through either their own civilian enforcement officers or the Police. The Agency cannot set a target for the executions of warrants.
	The Agency is working with the Office for Criminal Reform and the Department of Constitutional Affairs on an ongoing basis to improve the current time taken to execute arrest warrants.
	The current management information system cannot provide the average period between the issuance and execution of warrants. As at the end of January 2007 the Agency had 278 outstanding warrants in England and Wales. The average period for which these have been outstanding is approximately 50 weeks.
	I hope you find this response helpful.

Deprived Areas Fund

Justine Greening: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what deprived areas fund allocations his Department  (a) made in 2006-07 and  (b) plans to make in 2007-08, broken down by district; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  how much of the deprived areas funds allocated by his Department in 2006-07 have been spent, broken down by district; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Murphy: holding answer 23 March 2007
	Information on the Deprived Areas Fund allocation by district for 2006/07 and 2007/08 is in the table.
	Information on spend from the fund is only available for one district; Forth Valley, Fife and Tayside. It has recorded a spend of £17,640 to the end of February. Information on spend by other districts will be available later in the year as part of their regular reporting process.
	Any unspent allocation for 2006-07 will be carried over to 2007-08.
	
		
			  Deprived areas fund allocation 
			£ 
			  Jobcentre Plus District  2006-07  2007-08 
			 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire 98,877 313,000 
			 Essex 71,305 226,000 
			 Norfolk 69,404 222,000 
			 Cambridgeshire and Suffolk 58,946 189,000 
			 Derbyshire 173,034 537,000 
			 Leicestershire and Northamptonshire 292,828 79,576 
			 Lincolnshire and Rutland 91,271 287,000 
			 Nottinghamshire 402,163 186,998 
			 West London 373,640 0 
			 Central London 438,291 1,349,000 
			 City and East London 1,463,187 21,218 
			 Lambeth, Southwark and Wandsworth 905,103 2,780,000 
			 North and North East London 934,576 2,034,549 
			 South London 598,965 1 ,405,983 
			 Northumbria 533,365 0 
			 South Tyne and Wear Valley 810,030 527,309 
			 Tees Valley 518,153 1,596,000 
			 Cheshire and Warrington 59,897 193,000 
			 Cumbria 134,054 418,000 
			 Greater Mersey 574,246 0 
			 Liverpool and Wirral 791,966 0 
			 Lancashire 509,596 1,167,223 
			 Greater Manchester Central 803,374 0 
			 Greater Manchester East and West 422,128 0 
			 Ayrshire, Dumfries, Galloway and Inverclyde 436,389 1,344,000 
			 Edinburgh, Lothian and Borders 160,675 97,897 
			 Forth Valley, Fife and Tayside 405,966 793,303 
			 Glasgow 946,936 0 
			 Highlands, Islands and Clyde Coast and Grampian 365,084 1,125,000 
			 Lanarkshire and East Dunbartonshire 442,094 1,361,000 
			 Berks, Bucks and Oxfordshire 47,537 26,000 
			 Hampshire 47,537 110,000 
			 Kent 89,369 280,000 
			 Surrey and Sussex 86,517 274,000 
			 Devon and Cornwall 83,665 265,000 
			 Dorset and Somerset 47,537 89,000 
			 Gloucestershire, Wiltshire and Swindon 47,537 128,000 
			 West of England 96,025 301,000 
			 South Wales Valleys 922,217 1,233,587 
			 North and Mid Wales 186,345 492,035 
			 South East Wales 290,926 789,746 
			 South West Wales 486,778 1,491,000 
			 Birmingham and Solihull 821 ,438 0 
			 Coventry and Warwickshire 90,320 0 
			 Staffordshire 81 ,764 257,000 
			 The Black Country 463,961 0 
			 The Marches 0 0 
			 North East Yorkshire and The Humber 301,384 932,000 
			 South Yorkshire 538,118 0 
			 West Yorkshire 685,483 2,105,000 
			 Total 19,300,000 27,027,424 
			  Notes:  1. Districts recorded as having a zero Deprived Areas Fund (DAF) allocation for 2007/08 are in City Strategy areas. In these areas, DAF money will be allocated to City Strategy consortia.  2. In The Marches district, only one ward qualified for DAF allocation in 2006/07. As this was a very modest amount, a decision was taken to carry it forward to 2007/08 and include it in the City Strategy consortia allocation.   Source:  WP Areas Initiatives and Communities Division

Unemployment: Households

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the percentage of households of working age adults with no one in work in each year since 1977-78; what projection he has made of that percentage in 2007-08; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Murphy: The Labour Force Survey data used to answer this question is only available from 1992. The latest available data is for 2006. There is no information available on the projected percentage of households of working age adults with no one in work for 2007-08.
	The available information is in the following table.
	
		
			  Percentage of households of working age adults with no one in work in Great Britain from 1992-2006 
			  Quarter/As at spring  Percentage 
			 1992 19 
			 1993 19.3 
			 1994 20.7 
			 1995 20.1 
			 1996 18.5 
			 1997 17.7 
			 1998 17.4 
			 1999 16.8 
			 2000 16.2 
			 2001 16 
			 2002 16.1 
			 2003 15.8 
			 2004 15.5 
			 2005 15.7 
			 2006 15.4 
			  Notes: 1. Data for 1992-96 is non re-weighted and should not be used in conjunction with data from spring 1997 onwards. 2. Data has been adjusted for unknown economic activity. 3. Figures have been rounded to the nearest thousand.  Source: Labour Force Survey

Fire Services: Manpower

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many staff she expects to be transferred from existing fire control centres to the regional fire control centres; what consultation she has held with staff and unions about Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) transfer; and what arrangements she plans to make for staff unable to transfer to the new regional fire control centres.

Angela Smith: The number of staff transferring from existing control rooms will not be known until the local authority controlled companies have formulated proposals on staff numbers and structure, and criteria have been developed that define the circumstances under which it would be unreasonable for staff to transfer.
	The Department has published guidance on a wide range of issues relating to the transfer and many informal discussions with staff have been held. Formal consultation is a matter for the current employers and the Regional Control Centre companies. For staff who are unlikely to be able to transfer, fire and rescue authorities have been encouraged to find alternative jobs, and where appropriate, to provide retraining. Costs of redeployment and retraining will be borne by the Department, within reason. The Department seeks to avoid compulsory redundancies where possible.

HomeBuy Scheme

Clive Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many applications have been made for the  (a) Open Market HomeBuy,  (b) Social HomeBuy and  (c) New Build HomeBuy schemes; and how many have been (i) accepted and (ii) refused in each case.

Yvette Cooper: Between April 2006 and February 2007 there were 19,268 applications for Open Market HomeBuy, of which 10,580 have been approved so far by HomeBuy agents. Only a small number are rejected—the majority of those not approved will be still going through the application process. Of those applications approved, 716 were subsequently cancelled. This can be a result of applicants formally withdrawing from the scheme or, for example, detailed financial checks revealing county court judgments. In addition a large number of approved applicants will simply not pursue their application, without formally withdrawing it.
	Between April 2006 and February 2007 there were 73,556 applications for New Build HomeBuy of which 54,624 have been approved by HomeBuy Agents. Only a small number are rejected—the majority of those not approved will be still going through the application process. Information on cancelled approvals is not held for New Build HomeBuy because the applicants buy through a large number of housing association providers, and mortgages are available from all lenders.
	A large number of applicants will initially apply for both Open Market and New Build HomeBuy and will therefore feature in both figures.
	Between April 2006 and February 2007 534 applicants were received by RSLs for Social HomeBuy pilots. Information on applications declined for Social HomeBuy is not recorded on a monthly basis, but will be examined as part of an extensive monitoring exercise to be undertaken on the programme later this year.
	In the LA sector, between July 2006 and March 2007, 96 applications were received, of which 37 were refused.

Homelessness

Karen Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will break down by area of expenditure the costs associated with the pilot Working Futures scheme for homeless families.

Yvette Cooper: Households participating in Working Future pay an affordable rent based on the average weekly council rent for the area, the cost of which is met through housing benefit. The remaining housing costs, which reflect the higher rental and management costs associated with temporary accommodation, are funded separately through a direct central government grant. £2.28 million was made available at the start of the pilot. CLG provided an additional £60,000 in 2006-07 to fund support services to increase employability among homeless households placed in the subsidised temporary accommodation. 'Working Future' is a pilot led by the Greater London Authority and East Thames Group and these and other partner bodies have also contributed.

Local Government

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what advice and guidance she has circulated to local authority chief executives on how they should conduct themselves in respect of their public statements when contentious restructuring proposals are under debate; and if she will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: Within the statutory framework, including the requirements under the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 restricting certain officers' party political activities, the conduct of chief executives is a matter for them and their councils.
	Officials wrote to all chief executives in areas affected by the 16 unitary proposals under consultation, drawing their attention to the "Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity". The code makes it clear that local authorities should not at any time use public funds to mount publicity campaigns whose primary purpose is to persuade public to hold a particular view on a question of policy, and that authorities must take particular care when publicity is issued immediately prior to an election.

Natural Gas: Pipelines

Brian Binley: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what representations she has received on the length of time taken for  (a) planning decisions and  (b) other stages of gas infrastructure projects following initial planning applications.

Yvette Cooper: Since the beginning of the year, the Department has received a Parliamentary Question about delays in decision making following planning inquiries for gas storage infrastructure and one about the steps being taken to ensure the timely delivery of gas infrastructure projects.
	Delays in decision making in these cases can often be attributed to their extremely unusual, technical and complex nature. But the Government are committed to streamlining and simplifying the regulatory regime for approving infrastructure projects, and proposals for doing so will be contained in the forthcoming Planning White Paper, to be published in the spring.

Owner Occupation

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the level of owner-occupation is in each constituency.

Yvette Cooper: Levels of owner occupation by constituency, derived from the 2001 Census, are contained in a House of Commons Research Paper 04/01 entitled "2001 Census of Population: Statistics for Parliamentary Constituencies", published 30 January 2004.

Planning Permission: Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club

David Lepper: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what representations she has received on the impact on Brighton and Hove Albion Football Club of further delays in announcing a decision on its planning application for a community stadium at Falmer; and what the latest date is by which a decision on the matter will be announced.

Meg Munn: Following the quashing of the original decision on this case in the High Court, representations were sought on a range of issues from interested parties. A number of those representations address the impact on the football club of the lack of a final decision.
	My right hon. Friend set out her target for making a final decision on this case in her letter of 2 March. That date is 9 July, and there are no plans to amend that date.

Recycling: Birmingham

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the best value performance indicators were for kerbside collection of recyclables for Birmingham for each year since 2004-05; whether the authority is on target to comply with provisions in the Household Waste Recycling Act 2003; and what the figures are for  (a) other Metropolitan authorities and  (b) the best performing local authorities.

Ben Bradshaw: I have been asked to reply.
	The best value performance indicator (BVPI) for kerbside collection of recyclables was measured by BVPI 91 in 2004-05. In this year, Birmingham city council reported that 80.6 per cent of its household residents were served by a kerbside recycling collection.
	BVPI 91 was revised in 2005-06 to BVPI 91 a and BVPI 91 b, which measure the percentage of household residents served by kerbside recycling collection of  (a) one or more recyclables and  (b) at least two recyclables.
	In 2005-6, Birmingham city council reported that 90.0 per cent. of its household residents were served by kerbside recycling collection of one or more recyclables. 12.2 per cent. were served by collection of two or more recyclables.
	Results for BVPI 91 a and BVPI 91 b for 2005-06 for all Metropolitan districts with collection responsibilities are in the following table:
	
		
			  Metropolitan District  BV 91 a  BV 91 b 
			 Barnsley 98.0 98.0 
			 Birmingham 90.0 12.2 
			 Bolton 96.9 96.9 
			 Bradford 100.0 52.0 
			 Bury 98.0 67.3 
			 Calderdale 95.4 95.0 
			 Coventry 84.2 71.0 
			 Doncaster 98.8 98.8 
			 Dudley 88.0 88.0 
			 Gateshead 94.5 94.3 
			 Kirklees 88.7 88.7 
			 Knowsley 95.8 95.8 
			 Leeds 90.1 90.1 
			 Liverpool 91.8 91.8 
			 Manchester 83.0 83.0 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 89.2 89.2 
			 North Tyneside 98.9 98.9 
			 Oldham 95.0 95.0 
			 Rochdale 94.4 94.2 
			 Rotherham 100.0 100.0 
			 Salford 99.5 99.5 
			 Sandwell 85.4 84.5 
			 Sefton 97.0 97.0 
			 Sheffield 89.8 20.7 
			 Solihull 100.0 85.7 
			 South Tyneside 97.5 97.0 
			 St Helens 100.0 100.0 
			 Stockport 94.9 94.7 
			 Sunderland 98.8 97.3 
			 Tameside 100.0 89.1 
			 Trafford 100.0 86.0 
			 Wakefield City 96.7 42.9 
			 Walsall 95.5 95.5 
			 Wigan 99.5 29.1 
			 Wirral 100.0 65.8 
			 Wolverhampton 88.5 88.5 
		
	
	In 2005-06, two Metropolitan districts, Rotherham and St Helens, reported that 100 per cent. of household residents were served by kerbside recycling collection of two or more recyclables. For the same period, 125 of authorities (35.4 per cent.) with waste collection responsibilities reported the same level of kerbside collection in England.
	Under the Household Waste Recycling Act 2003, all local authorities in England are required to collect at least two types of recyclable waste from all households in their area by the end of 2010. It is up to each local authority to plan how it fulfils this requirement.

Temporary Accommodation

Karen Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary's statement on 21 March 2007,  Official Report, column 288WH, on households in temporary accommodation, what discussions her Department has had with the Department of Work and Pensions on extending the pilot Working Futures scheme for homeless families.

Yvette Cooper: 'Working Future' is a pilot led by the Greater London Authority and East Thames Group testing the use of a central block grant to subsidise the cost of procuring temporary accommodation in the private sector, which also promotes affordable rents and allows increased access to employment services and training opportunities for 100 households in three London boroughs. There is ongoing dialogue between my Department and the Department of Work and Pensions regarding 'Working Future'. An evaluation is under way, the result of which will feed into future policy development in this area.

Childbirth

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many births in Northern Ireland in the last year were to mothers aged  (a) 17 years,  (b) 16 years,  (c) 15 years and  (d) under 15 years of age, broken down by health board area.

David Hanson: The following table gives the number of live- and still-births(1) registered in 2006(3) by age and Health and Social Services Board(2) of residence of mother.
	
		
			  Mother's age  Eastern HSSB  Northern HSSB  Southern HSSB  Western HSSB  Northern Ireland 
			 Under 15 years 4 2 0 1 7 
			 15 11 12 4 2 29 
			 16 59 33 11 10 113 
			 17 114 53 38 52 257 
			 (1 )Birth is defined to be either live- or still-birth. Pregnancies which resulted in the birth of twins, triplets or other multiple births are counted twice, three times, etc. (2 )Births have been allocated to the area of usual residence of the mother based on her postcode. The data includes only those births to mothers resident in Northern Ireland at the time of birth. (3 )Provisional data.

Down District Council: Recruitment

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many positions have been advertised by Down District Council in the last 12 months; and what the religion was of those subsequently appointed to those positions.

David Cairns: Employment policies and procedures are maters for each individual council. I have therefore asked the Chief Executive of Down district council to respond direct to you.

Further Education: Internet

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which further education colleges in Northern Ireland offer on-line courses.

Maria Eagle: Although it is not mandatory for further education colleges in Northern Ireland to offer on-line courses, all 16 further education colleges, to a greater or lesser degree, offer on-line learning in some courses. Access to on-line or blended learning; and the number of courses for which it is available, varies extensively across the 16 colleges.

Paper: Recycling

David Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what assessment he has made of the outcomes of the 12 month pilot project which began on 1 April 2006 involving the use by all departments in Northern Ireland of photocopying paper manufactured from a minimum of 70 per cent. post-consumer waste.

David Hanson: An initial assessment of the outcome of the 12 month pilot project, which began on 1 April 2006, is currently under way and will be presented to the Northern Ireland Procurement Board at its next meeting in late May.
	I will forward the hon. Gentleman a copy of this paper for information following its consideration by the Procurement Board.

Employment: West Midlands

Lorely Burt: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry pursuant to the answer of 20 February 2007,  Official Report, column 658W, on MG Rover, in which sectors the 100,000 jobs have been created; what the locations are of the 1,000 hectares of brownfield land which have been reclaimed; and what initiatives  (a) Advantage West Midlands,  (b) the Learning and Skills Council and  (c) Birmingham City Council have put in place to assist unemployed former employees of MG Rover and its suppliers.

Margaret Hodge: Advantage West Midlands do not collect data in the form asked. The agency does have data which disaggregates the jobs total by whether they are jobs in rural, urban or disadvantaged areas but these data are only available from 2005-06 onwards. The sector data are not available and to disaggregate the totals by sector can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	Similarly the total figure of 1,000 hectares of brownfield land which have been reclaimed cannot be disaggregated in the way requested, except at disproportionate cost.
	AWM is able to account for 459 hectares of brownfield sites reclaimed since 2003. The remaining 541 hectares were acquired through legacy projects funded by other agencies and programmes, such as the SRB programme and English Partnership.
	 MG Rover
	Following the highly successful work of the MG Rover Task Force over 95 per cent. of ex-MG Rover employees are now back in work. The remaining 260 job seekers are able to access a number of initiatives delivered in partnership by AWM, the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and Birmingham city council. These are:
	South West Business Connections, led by Birmingham city council
	Work for you Project—Partnership project between AWM and Birmingham city council
	Working for jobs—initiative involving AWM, LSC and Job Centre Plus
	Northfield and Longbridge Uplift Project—led by Birmingham city council

Graffiti

Shailesh Vara: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much was spent on removing graffiti in each local authority area in each of the last five years for which figures are available.

Ben Bradshaw: This information is not held by my Department. Local authorities (LAs) do not have a duty to clear graffiti and so do not receive funding for its clearance.
	Under sections 48-52 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, LAs can issue a Defacement Removal Notice on the owners, occupiers and operators of land and buildings owned by a statutory undertaker or educational institution and which are accessible or visible to the public. These notices can also be served on objects in or on the public street such as cable boxes, telephone kiosks and bus stops. Once served, the company or statutory undertaker has 28 days to remove the defacement. If the defacement has not been removed after this time, the LA can remove it itself and recover the costs of doing so. LAs are required to make reasonable attempts to enter into partnership with the property owners before issuing any notices under sections 48-52.

Whales: Conservation

Martin Horwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps he has taken to oppose the lifting of the moratorium on commercial whaling; and if he will write in opposition to lifting of the ban to his counterparts in  (a) Denmark,  (b) other member governments of the European Union,  (c) St Lucia,  (d) St Vincent and The Grenadines,  (e) Antigua and Barbuda,  (f) Dominica,  (g) Grenada,  (h) St Kitts and Nevis,  (i) Solomon Islands,  (j) Belize,  (k) Toralu,  (l) Kinibati,  (m) The Gambia,  (n) Cameroon and Nauru,  (o) other Commonwealth members of the International Whaling Commission and  (p) other members of the International Whaling Commission.

Ben Bradshaw: The UK will continue to protest at the highest diplomatic level against the resumption of commercial whaling and we will continue our efforts, along with other countries, to urge those countries that support whaling to reconsider their position.
	DEFRA officials ensure that Foreign and Commonwealth Office posts in the relevant capitals are briefed, and engage in discussion with their counterparts on whaling at every appropriate opportunity. This ensures that these countries are in no doubt of the importance that the UK attaches to whale conservation. UK embassies and Ministers across Government will continue to lobby on this issue in the run-up to the next annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission in Alaska in May.

Golden Arrow Communications

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what meetings his Department's Ministers have held with representatives of Golden Arrow Communications over the last 12 months.

Gerry Sutcliffe: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 27 March 2007,  Official Report, column 1443W.

Prisoners: British Nationality

Brian Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many  (a) British nationals were in prison abroad and  (b) non-EU nationals were imprisoned in the UK in each of the last five years.

Gerry Sutcliffe: Figures on the numbers of both non-European Union prisoners held in prison establishments in England and Wales and the numbers of new detentions of British nationals held in prisons abroad can be found in the table. The Scottish Executive and The Northern Ireland Prison Service respectively hold information on prison numbers in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
	The figures on the numbers of British nationals detained in foreign prisons were taken from the answer given by my hon. Friend, Minister of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Clegg) to his question on 16 January 2007,  Official Report, column 999W. As at 30 September 2006, we were aware of 2,421 British nationals in detention overseas, either on remand or serving a custodial sentence.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
	
		
			  Non-EU foreign nationals in prisons in England and Wales 
			  30 June:  Number 
			 2002 6,248 
			 2003 7,359 
			 2004 7,043 
			 2005 7,639 
			 2006 8,554 
		
	
	
		
			  British nationals in prison abroad( 1) 
			   Number 
			 2001 7,861 
			 2002 6,501 
			 2003-04 6,744 
			 2004-05 5,227 
			 2005-06 4,814 
			 (1)These are the number of new detentions of British nationals each year, not the numbers held at any given date. The following is a link to show European Union membership http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1139991776535

Prisoners: Suicide

Clive Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the incidence of suicide and self-harm has been for prisoners serving indeterminate public protection sentences.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The exact information about Indeterminate Public Protection sentenced prisoners has not been collated in the requested format and can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Serious Fraud

Anne Moffat: To ask the Solicitor-General if he will assess the merits of introducing plea bargaining in serious fraud cases.

Mike O'Brien: When the Government responded to the recommendations of the Fraud Review on 15 March 2007 it indicated that a working group would be established to explore how far it was possible to introduce a framework for plea negotiations in the context of the criminal courts in England and Wales. The group is scheduled to start its work next month; and a symposium chaired by the Attorney-General will be held on 30 April to explore some of the issues.

Serious Fraud

Ian Austin: To ask the Solicitor-General what role he plans for plea bargaining in combating fraud following the fraud review.

Mike O'Brien: The Government have accepted the recommendations of the Fraud Review that further consideration should be given to the means by which we might introduce a framework for plea negotiations/plea bargaining into our criminal justice system. A working group is being established to carry forward detailed consideration of the issues which need to be resolved.

Human Trafficking

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Solicitor-General what steps the Crown Prosecution Service is taking to improve prosecution rates in cases of alleged human trafficking.

Mike O'Brien: Since the introduction of human trafficking offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 the number of prosecutions brought to court has increased from 16 in 2004-05 to 116 in 2006-07.
	The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) can only prosecute those cases which are referred to it by investigators. The CPS is working with colleagues in the Home Office to strengthen and improve investigation, law enforcement and the prosecution process against those who commit human trafficking offences.
	The UK Action Plan on tackling human trafficking, which was published on 23 March 2007, recognises the need to ensure that human trafficking becomes part of 'core' police business by improving the capability of the police and its partners. Actions include the development of 'key diagnostic indicators' to measure performance and progress in dealing with human trafficking issues.
	The UK Human Trafficking Centre (UK HTC) is now recognised as the central point for the development of law enforcement expertise. The CPS is working closely with the UK HTC in developing .and taking forward training packages and courses for police, other law enforcement agencies and crown prosecutors. Training, together with the development of an early victim identification toolkit for front line police and immigration officers, will enable identification of trafficked victims at the earliest opportunity. This should prevent potential trafficked victims, who have committed immigration offences, from being removed prior to them providing information or intelligence to investigators.

Fraud: Victims

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Solicitor-General what steps he is taking to ensure that lessons about how to ensure justice for victims of fraud are learned from recent prosecutions.

Mike O'Brien: My hon. Friend has drawn my attention to a recent case involving two constituents raises issues about the way our current provisions for dealing with confiscation and compensate operate.
	The Fraud Review, commissioned by the Government in 2005 conducted a short survey of fraud victims from a random selection of City of London prosecutions. It was apparent from the survey that victims were predominantly concerned that fraud offences would not be repeated. Victims also hoped to be compensated for their losses although had no general expectation that this would happen.
	The Fraud Review recommended that the Crown court should have wider powers to deal with the consequences of fraud offences. The Government have agreed that these recommendations need to be considered further, and that consideration will include wider powers to compensate victims of fraud offences. In considering potential wider powers the views and experiences of victims will be one of the main considerations.
	In giving further consideration to these issues, the Government will consider any lessons we might learn from other jurisdictions.

Honours: Prosecutions

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Solicitor-General whether he would proceed with the appointment of named counsel to advise him on whether prosecutions under the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925 should proceed if the approval of the Leader of the Opposition is not forthcoming.

Mike O'Brien: The Attorney-General has previously indicated the arrangements which his Office will put in place if he is consulted by the Crown Prosecution Service in the current "honours" case. These will ensure objectivity, independence and transparency through the appointment of independent senior counsel to consider the CPS conclusions and advise. The Attorney has undertaken to consult Opposition spokesmen in an attempt to secure prior agreement on the choice of counsel. A decision on who to instruct will be taken then. If, following this process, a decision is taken not to prosecute, counsel's advice relating to that decision will be made public.
	The Attorney-General has made it clear that he will exercise his role independently of Government, in accordance with the law and the evidence. We are clear that our first duty as Law Officers is to the law, not to party politics.

Aircraft Carriers

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the capability of the Royal Navy to execute carrier-based air superiority missions following the decommissioning of the Sea Harrier; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: The primary function of carrier borne airpower is the direct support of ground operations, for which the Harrier GR7/GR9 aircraft are eminently suited. In an operation where there is a significant air threat to maritime forces, air defence will be provided by either land-based or coalition aircraft in addition to the sea-based air defence capability. In the future, the Joint Strike Fighter will give the joint force the ability to contribute to the full spectrum of fast jet air operations from either a carrier or a land base.

Armed Forces: Cadets

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the proportion of  (a) Gap Year Commission and  (b) Combined Cadet Force recruits who subsequently entered the regular forces in each year since 1997.

Derek Twigg: On the subject of Gap Year Commissions, I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 5 February 2007,  Official Report, column 687W, to the hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr. Mitchell).
	The information on the proportion of the Combined Cadet Force that go on to join the regular armed forces is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

Armed Forces: Casualties

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence to which UK  (a) military and  (b) civilian airports British armed forces casualties are evacuated.

Adam Ingram: To establish an appropriate aeromedical evacuation pathway, British armed forces casualties are medically risk assessed on an individual basis. Most military patients are flown to RAF Brize Norton, Oxfordshire or (in the case of a Hercules aircraft transfer) to RAF Lyneham in Wiltshire.
	Should the medical risk assessment identify an urgent clinical need, arrangements will be made to fly patients to the most appropriate airfield, either military or civilian, for quick access to the receiving hospital or facility. In most cases, the most appropriate airfield will be the East Midlands Airport to enable rapid transfer to the University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHBFT), the main reception centre for Service casualties and home of the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine (RCDM). However, other civilian airfields have been used occasionally to place patients in the most appropriate place as soon as possible.
	In the event of large numbers of patients being repatriated, the destination airfield is defined by the Reception Arrangements for Military Patients (RAMP) agreed from a rota produced by the Department of Health (DH) and Department for Transport (DFT) based on:
	Location of available NHS resources and the required treatment for the patients.
	The requirement to avoid overloading facilities in any one NHS region.
	Type of aircraft and the likely patient load.
	Aircraft capability and expected weather conditions.

Armed Forces: Employment

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many servicemen from the 3(rd) Battalion of the Parachute Regiment have been granted permission to serve in the private security sector while still a serving member of the armed forces in  (a) the UK,  (b) Dubai,  (c) Iraq and  (d) Afghanistan in the last five months; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: No serviceman from the 3(rd) Battalion Parachute Regiment has either sought or been granted permission to serve in the private security sector while serving in the armed forces during the last five months in any country. Queen's Regulations for the Army clearly states that such employment is not permitted, this includes personnel who are on terminal leave at the end of their service.

Armed Forces: Housing

Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence from whom the house occupied by the  (a) Commander in Chief Land and  (b) Adjutant General is rented.

Derek Twigg: As with all service personnel occupying service families accommodation in England and Wales, the houses occupied by Commander in Chief Land and the Adjutant General are owned by Annington Homes Ltd. and leased back under the terms agreed under the sale of the Married Quarter Estate in November 1996.

Armed Forces: Northern Ireland

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much was spent by his Department to help members of the armed forces living in Northern Ireland with their transition back to civilian life in each of the last three years; how much of that sum was spent on housing; and what personnel were responsible for this task over the same period, broken down by grade.

Adam Ingram: The cost of providing third line contracted-out career transition partnership (CTP) services to service leavers using the Regional Resettlement Centre (RRC) at Aldergrove during Financial Years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 was £286,000, £397,000 and £391,000 respectively. These sums cover only the per capita payments made to the CTP contractor, Right-Courts Ltd, for full resettlement service registrations and discharges, and employment support programme registrations and discharges. It does not cover the cost of providing the facilities of RRC Aldergrove to the CTP contractor, or his staffing costs, which cannot be disaggregated from contracted price standing charges for all CTP facility manpower across the UK and Germany.
	Neither do these figures include the cost of resettlement services provided in Northern Ireland by single service education and resettlement staffs: such information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Moreover, disaggregation of the proportion of time spent on resettlement provision by many who also deliver general education services to service personnel stationed in Northern Ireland would be subjective in the absence of recorded activity. The cost of resettlement training for the service leavers using RRC Aldergrove over this period, and their associated travel and subsistence costs, is not held centrally and could also only be provided at disproportionate cost. However, the maximum sum claimable by service leavers who discharged over this period in terms of individual resettlement training costs grant only would have been in the order of £900,000.
	None of the per capita sums represents housing costs.
	Since all CTP services are provided under contract, and not directly by the MOD, no MOD personnel were directly involved in delivering services under the CTP contract. Information on the break-down of grade structure of MOD personnel involved in delivering resettlement services at unit or local level could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Armed Forces: Northern Ireland

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of the armed forces living in Northern Ireland received support to aid their transition back to civilian life in each of the last three years; and how many were assisted with housing issues.

Adam Ingram: 2,102 members of the armed forces were discharged through the Regional Resettlement Centre at RAF Aldergrove during financial years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07, although it is not possible to confirm that all of these Service leavers were living in Northern Ireland at the time or subsequently settled in the Province. The breakdown, which does not include serving personnel still moving through the resettlement process, is as follows:
	
		
			   Financial year  
			  Numbers taking up  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07  Total 
			 Full resettlement programme 491 615 674 1,680 
			 Employment support programme 194 139 89 422 
		
	
	The personnel moving through resettlement include approximately a further 1,562 Royal Irish (Home Service) redundees who commenced resettlement preparation from 6 January 2006 but have yet to reach their phased exit date. The 1,680 includes 273 RI(HS) who were discharged by March 2007.
	Information on the numbers of these Service leavers assisted with housing is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Armed Forces: Northern Ireland

Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what support is provided to service personnel living in Northern Ireland to aid their transition back to civilian life, with particular reference to housing.

Adam Ingram: The Ministry of Defence has set up the Joint Service Housing Advice Office (JSHAO) to provide advice, guidance and support on all aspects of accommodation when leaving the Services. In addition to this, the Service Leavers Support team provide specific support for Service personnel in Northern Ireland.
	These offices provide links to local authorities and Housing Associations throughout the UK and can offer advice on all housing options available; these include applications for social housing, shared or co-ownership schemes and advice on renting or purchasing a property.
	MOD also provides a Long Service Advance of Pay (LSAP) of up to £8,500 repaid over 10 years and prior to discharge to assist in purchasing a property. This is intended to encourage home ownership in preparation to leaving the Services.

Iraq: Peace Keeping Operations

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  how much money was spent on psychiatric aftercare of Territorial Army members who served in Iraq and Afghanistan in each of the last five years;
	(2)  how many members of the Territorial Army who have completed tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan have sought psychiatric assistance following demobilisation; what medical support services are provided by the armed forces to members of the Territorial Army upon demobilisation; and by what means the Government monitors the health of Territorial Army members following demobilisation.

Derek Twigg: I will write to the hon. Member and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

Iraq: Peace Keeping Operations

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of the Territorial Army  (a) are on deployment in (i) Iraq and (ii) Afghanistan and  (b) have served in each country in the last five years.

Adam Ingram: As of 4 April 2007, there were around 280 Territorial Army (TA) personnel deployed in Iraq and around 260 in Afghanistan. This excludes those members of the TA deployed on full-time reserve service.
	Since March 2003, we estimate over 10,000 members of the TA have served in Iraq based on mobilisation figures, but exact data is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Since May 2006, we estimate on a similar basis that around 450 members of the TA have served in Afghanistan. Data for service in Afghanistan during the preceding years is unavailable.

Iraq: Peace Keeping Operations

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what medical services are made available by the armed forces to members of the regular army upon the completion of tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Derek Twigg: Members of the regular Royal Navy, Army, Royal Air Force and Royal Marines have access to a wide range of medical and dental services at all times when they are not operational deployment overseas. The range of services can be summarised as follows:
	Primary Medical Care;
	Regional Rehabilitation Services;
	Dental Services (including dental hygiene);
	Secondary Medical Care at the University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (UHBFT) where the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine (RCDM) is based, at NHS hospitals hosting Ministry of Defence Hospital Units (MDHUs) and other NHS hospitals when required;
	Rehabilitation Services provided by the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre (DMRC), Headley Court;
	Community and In-patient Mental Health Services.

Military Equipment: Iran

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what UK military equipment was seized by Iran in  (a) 2004 and  (b) 2007; and what its value is.

Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the value was of United Kingdom equipment seized by Iran in the Iraqi-Iran waterways in  (a) 2004 and  (b) 2007.

Des Browne: holding answer s 24 April 2007
	In 2004 the equipment seized by the Iranian authorities consisted of: two Combat Support Boats, six rifles and sights, six pistols and ammunition, radios and navigation equipment, global positioning system and maritime charts. The estimated replacement cost was approximately £500,000.
	The equipment seized by Iranians during the capture of the 15 Royal Naval personnel in 2007 consisted of: two Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats, seven carbines, four rifles, 10 pistols and ammunition, communications and navigation systems, body armour, helmets, goggles and camera equipment. The replacement cost is estimated at around £270,000.

Reserved Forces: National Insurance Contributions

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the number of reservists who are overpaying national insurance; and if he will make a statement.

Derek Twigg: The change over to a new payroll system in April 2007 may impact adversely on the national insurance charge levied on some reservists due to two or more months' attendance pay being paid at the end of April 2007. It is too early to quantify the extent of the problem because data is still being input by Units and has yet to be analysed.
	Once the extent of any problem has been determined a case will, if appropriate, be made by MOD to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs for a central adjustment to correct overpayments. Any individuals who believe they have overpaid national insurance can, in the usual way, claim a refund at the end of the tax year.

Departments: Oral Questions

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many questions tabled by hon. and right hon. Members to her Department for oral answer have been transferred to other Departments since May 2005.

David Lammy: Six oral questions tabled by hon. and right hon. Members to DCMS have been transferred to other Departments between 18 May 2005 and 16 April 2007.
	Questions are only transferred to another Department when it is clear that DCMS are not responsible for that area of policy and only when the other Department has agreed to answer it. Members are always notified promptly.

Digital Broadcasting: Cheadle

Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what estimate she has made of the number of households which will qualify for the targeted assistance scheme for the digital switchover; and how many of those households are in Cheadle constituency.

Shaun Woodward: Our current estimate is that 7.1 million households will be eligible for the Digital Switchover Help scheme (DSHS) nationally. For the Cheadle constituency, we estimate around 10 000 households will be eligible.
	 Notes:
	Totals are rounded to the nearest thousand.
	Eligibility for help from the Digital Switchover Help scheme will be by benefit unit rather than the whole household definition used by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly Government and the Northern Ireland Office to forecast future household growth.
	The definition of a benefit unit is a couple and any dependent children. It excludes adults deemed to be non-dependents who, if eligible, will be able to claim assistance from the Help scheme in their own right.

Digital Broadcasting: Cheadle

Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what measures have been put in place to ensure that those eligible for the Targeted Assistance scheme for the digital switchover in Cheadle constituency are contacted by the most appropriate means.

Shaun Woodward: Using Department for Work and Pensions and local authority data, the Digital Switchover Help scheme operator will write to every eligible individual well in advance of switchover in their area. This will give options to enable them to continue to receive television services after switchover. Where the scheme operator has information about the particular communications needs of individuals, it will aim to tailor its communications accordingly. In addition, Digital UK will provide generic communications about the Help scheme.

Digital Switchover

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 28 March 2007,  Official Report, column 1550W, on digital switchover, whether the figure includes those households of people who are registered as blind or partially sighted but not on Department of Work and Pensions lists.

Shaun Woodward: We estimate around 80 per cent. of registered blind and partially sighted people will be over 75 or receive a qualifying disability-related benefit. A further 50,000 people, or 0.7 per cent. of the total eligible households, nationwide may be eligible on grounds of blind or partially sighted registration alone. Our current estimates of the number of households in Whitehaven who qualify for assistance do not include those who qualify on grounds of registration alone but will be within the rounding tolerances given for the Whitehaven estimates.

Energy: Conservation

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 16 April 2007,  Official Report, column 17W, on energy: conservation, if she will list the energy producing features contained in the Government's Better Public Building initiative.

David Lammy: The Better Public Building initiative aims to encourage high-quality design in all new public building. It does not itself set standards or recommend specific design solutions relating to energy producing features. Rather it sets out principles for good design (which include sustainability) and exemplifies its benefits.
	There are therefore no specific requirements for energy producing features to be incorporated into new build or refurbished buildings within the Government's Better Public Building initiative. However, alongside energy efficiency and low energy measures, it is encouraged and buildings that do so are championed, for example through the Prime Minister's Award for Better Public Building
	http://www.betterpublicbuildings.gov.uk/
	The section on environmentally sustainable design on pages eight and nine of Better public building (December 2006) summarises this position.

Licensing Laws: Urban Areas

Anne Snelgrove: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment she has made of the consistency of application of the Licensing Act 2003 by local authorities in urban areas.

Shaun Woodward: The evaluation of the impact of the Licensing Act 2003 includes, among other things, a review of the statutory Guidance given to the licensing authorities; the independent review of licence fees, which has included some areas of licensing administration; the impact of the Act on the four licensing objectives; and the DCMS simplification plan published in December last year. The evaluation will not be complete until later this year. It should be noted that the administration of the 2003 Act is devolved by its provisions to local licensing authorities. Local licensing authorities have some discretion to respond to local circumstances and absolute consistency is not an aim of the legislation. Where inconsistency is generated by misunderstanding, the Government have attempted to provide clarification through the statutory Guidance. We expect to publish revised Guidance in the early summer.

Museums and Galleries: Theatre

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many  (a) museums and  (b) theatres (i) opened and (ii) closed in (A) the United Kingdom, (B) each region and (C) each London borough in each month of the last five years.

David Lammy: Museums and the arts outside of England are devolved matters. Information on local authority funded museums and theatres, or independent museums and theatres, is not held centrally. Four branches of DCMS sponsored museums have opened in the last five years: The Churchill Suite (April 2003) together with The Churchill Museum (February 2005) at the Cabinet War Rooms, Whitehall, part of the Imperial War Museum and located in the London borough of Westminster; The Museum in Docklands (May 2003), part of the Museum of London Group and located in the London borough of Tower Hamlets; Imperial War Museum of the North (July 2002) in the North West; and Locomotion (September 2004) in the North East, a branch of the National Museum of Science and Industry.
	Two branches of DCMS sponsored museums have closed in the last five years: The Museum of Liverpool Life (June 2006) in the North West, part of National Museums Liverpool, but with a new Museum of Liverpool scheduled to open in 2010; and the Theatre Museum (January 2007) part of the Victoria and Albert Museum and located in the London borough of Camden.
	Two Arts Council England funded producing theatres have opened in the last five years: Hampstead Theatre (February 2003, London borough of Camden) and the Unicorn (December 2005, London borough of Southwark).
	Five Arts Council England funded producing theatres have closed in the last five years:
	
		
			  Region  Closure 
			 London The Bridewell (December 2004, City of London) and Southwark Playhouse (September 2006, London borough of Southwark) 
			 North West Chester Gateway (March 2007), but new performing arts centre scheduled to open in 2010-11. 
			 South East Gardner Arts Centre, Brighton (March 2007) and The Haymarket Theatre, Basingstoke (January 2007, but scheduled to re-open in September 2007)

Africa: Peace Keeping Operations

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports she has received from the British ambassador to the United Nations following the Security Council briefing by the African Union Chairman Alpha Omar Konare.

Ian McCartney: My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary chaired an informal private meeting, bringing together all members of the UN Security Council (UNSC) with the UN Secretary-General and African Union (AU) chairperson on 16 April.
	Following the meeting the UK, as UNSC president, issued a press statement on behalf of the council, welcoming the Government of Sudan's acceptance of the Heavy support package to the AU mission in Sudan. It also called on the Government of Sudan to facilitate the immediate deployment of the peacekeeping package, as agreed at the Addis Ababa and Abuja summits last November. It was agreed that the UNSC president will write to the UN Secretary-General to request funding for the package from the General Assembly. The UNSC members also called for an immediate ceasefire; a renewed political process; and an improvement in the humanitarian situation.

Democratic Republic of Congo; Angola

Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports she has received on the activities of Angolan military forces in territory of the Democratic Republic of Congo in Kahemba district; and if she will make a statement.

Ian McCartney: Angolan forces are currently positioned in Kahemba on what they consider to be Angolan territory. The Congolese and Angolan Foreign and Interior Ministers have had discussions on the disputed territory of Kahemba and are committed to the peaceful resolution of the border dispute. An investigative commission went to Kahemba and will report to the Democratic Republic of Congo Parliament in due course.
	On 15 December 2006 Angola signed up to the Security, Stability and Development Pact for the Great Lakes region. With international partners we continue to call on the signatories to ratify the pact, resolve in a constructive manner their shared security and border problems and to ensure their territory is not used by armed groups to infringe on the sovereignty of others.

Mr. Kiyemba Mutale

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what  (a) reports she has received and  (b) representations she has made to the Ugandan authorities on the assault of Mr. Kiyemba Mutale on 1 March; and if she will make a statement.

Ian McCartney: Our high commission in Kampala is following the case of the alleged People's Redemption Army suspects closely. We were concerned by the eye-witness and media reports of an assault on Mr. Mutale.
	We have not made specific representations to the Government of Uganda about Mr. Mutale's case. However, on 5 March my noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Lord Triesman of Tottenham, raised our concerns about events on 1 March at the Ugandan High Court with the Ugandan high commissioner in London. Our high commissioner in Kampala, with other EU heads of mission, made representations to the acting Foreign Minister, Henry Okello Oryem on 2 March, including on the violence used by the security forces, and again most recently with other EU heads of mission on 13 April with Foreign Minister Kutesa. We continue to press all sides to respect the rule of law, human rights and abide by the constitution.

Official Visits

Richard Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which countries do not receive an official welcome from the Government for their Ministers on official visits to the UK.

Geoff Hoon: Only Ministers that have been invited as guests of the Government receive an official welcome. On arrival in the UK they are met by a representative of my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.

Sudan

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps her Department has taken to extend the arms embargo established under UN Security Council resolutions 1556 and 1591 in co-operation with the UN Panel of Experts  (a) to cover the whole of Sudan and  (b) to reflect the full inventory of weapons held by all parties to the conflict.

Ian McCartney: At a meeting of the UN Security Council on 16 April chaired by my right. hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, she made the case for further sanctions to pressure the Government of Sudan and rebel movements to abide by their agreements. We are discussing a draft UN Security Council Resolution with other Security Council members to extend the UN arms embargo to the whole of Sudan covering arms and related military material. If the Sudanese Government and rebels do not co-operate and fulfil their obligations, we must be prepared to take tougher measures.

Sudan: Peace Keeping Operations

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of statements by the Sudanese government that 3,000 United Nations peacekeepers will be allowed into Darfur; whether the deployment is to include  (a) attack helicopters and  (b) armoured personnel carriers to help African Union forces; under what remit these peacekeepers will serve; and if she will make a statement.

Ian McCartney: My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary welcomed the Sudanese acceptance of the UN's heavy support package (HSP) for Darfur at a Security Council discussion on 16 April. However, it is only a step towards the full African Union (AU)/UN hybrid operation that was agreed six months ago in Addis Ababa. We are now looking to the Sudanese to ensure they honour their commitments through the speedy implementation of the HSP and hybrid force.
	The HSP will include attack helicopters. Armoured personnel carriers are provided through a light support package which is already deploying. The HSP will prepare the way for a foil AU/UN hybrid force, as well as reinforce the police and civilian elements of the current AU mission.

Uganda: Armed Conflict

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of a new ceasefire agreement between the Ugandan Government and the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA); what terms have been agreed between both parties; and what reports she has received from the United Nations Special Envoy Joachim Chissano on his meetings with the LRA leader.

Ian McCartney: We are encouraged that the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement between the Government of Uganda and the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) was extended on 14 April. The parties have agreed that the LRA will assemble at a designated assembly point in southern Sudan by 25 May. The Juba peace talks are set to resume today. We call on all parties to remain focused on finding a peaceful resolution to this long running conflict, and to implement their commitments.
	The UN Special Envoy for LRA Affected Areas, former Mozambican President Joaquim Chissano, briefed the our high commissioner in Kampala along with other members of the international community, most recently on 15 April, following his meeting with LRA leaders on 13 April. We will continue to support his efforts.

Zimbabwe: Human Rights

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent representations the Government have made to the United Nations Human Rights Council on  (a) political and civil rights,  (b) freedom of the press and  (c) food provision in Zimbabwe.

Ian McCartney: In my address to the Human Rights Council (HRC) on 13 March, I expressed the UK's utter condemnation of the violent repression of peaceful protestors on 11 March. The UK made a statement at the HRC on 29 March expressing our deep concern at events in Zimbabwe. We urged the Government of Zimbabwe to allow its people to express their political views without harassment, intimidation or violence and to repeal repressive legislation that curtails the freedom of the media, expression and association. We also confirmed our commitment to alleviate the suffering of ordinary Zimbabweans caused by the Government of Zimbabwe's misgovernance by continuing to provide humanitarian assistance and food relief.
	In addition, we urged the UN special rapporteur for freedom of opinion and expression and the UN special rapporteur on torture to visit Zimbabwe and report back to the HRC at its sixth session, and welcomed the commitment made by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to monitor the judicial process against Mr Tsvangirai and his colleagues.
	Also on 29 March, 50 UN member states supported a statement by the EU presidency at the HRC expressing concern at the situation in Zimbabwe and, at our request, the Office of the Commissioner for Humanitarian Affairs briefed the UN Security Council in New York on the humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe: Politics and Government

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations  (a) she and  (b) representatives of her Department have made to (i) Zimbabwean authorities and (ii) the Ugandan authorities on physical attacks on the leaders of the opposition in their countries; and if she will make a statement.

Ian McCartney: On Zimbabwe, both my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and my noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Lord Triesman of Tottenham, have made statements condemning the violent and unwarranted action taken by that country's Government on 11 March and stating clearly that we hold Mugabe and his government responsible for the safety of all those detained. The same strong message was delivered to the Zimbabwean ambassador in London when he was summoned by my noble Friend Lord Triesman on 13 March. I also condemned the Government of Zimbabwe in my address to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on 13 March and both the UK and EU made similar statements of condemnation at the Human Rights Council on 29 March.
	We are not aware of any recent physical attacks against leaders of the Ugandan opposition. However, in our contacts with the Government of Uganda and with Ugandan opposition parties, we continue to stress the importance of maintaining a pluralist democracy, developing civil society, and respecting the rule of law.

Accident and Emergency Departments

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 12 March 2007,  Official Report, column 117W, on accident and emergency departments, what the evidential basis is for increasing consensus among professional bodies that a critical size of hospital is required to ensure that specialist facilities are available to treat all patients with emergency needs safely; and what the  (a) date of publication and  (b) professional body responsible is in each case.

Andy Burnham: Reports for example by Collins (1999) "Organisation of acute general services" Joint Consultants Committee, and from The Royal College of Surgeons (2006) "Delivering high quality surgical services for the future; a consultation document from The Royal College of Surgeons of England reconfiguration working party", make reference to suggested catchment areas for hospitals and services that should be available.

Arun Community Hospital

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she expects rebuilding work to begin on the Arun Community hospital; and if she will make a statement on the Government's policy on community hospitals.

Andy Burnham: We are committed to community hospitals where they represent the best solutions for local communities. As such we have set up a five-year, £750 million programme to support the development of community hospitals and services.
	The future of Arun Community hospital is a matter for the local national health service. I am informed by NHS South East Coast that the future configuration of community hospitals, including Arun Community hospital, is a key part of West Sussex primary care trust's strategy. However, no decisions on the future of community hospitals in West Sussex will be made until the outcome of the "Creating an NHS Fit for the Future" consultation exercise for West Sussex is known.

Care Homes: Fees and Charges

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what account has been taken by her Department of the views of older people living in care homes who are in receipt of the personal expenses allowance in the annual consultation on residential care charges;
	(2)  what assessment her Department has made of the impact on the quality of life of older people in care homes of an increase of the personal allowance to £40 per week, as part of its annual consultation on residential care charges.

Ivan Lewis: A number of meetings have been held with key stakeholders representing care home residents, to discuss a range of issues relating to the assessment of resources regulations, including the personal expenses allowance (PEA). Stakeholders involved have included voluntary organisations such as Age Concern, Help the Aged, the Nursing Home Fees Agency, the Relatives and Residents Association and MENCAP. The views of stakeholders will be considered and there will be a further meeting with them before recommendations are put to Ministers.
	I have made no assessment of the impact on the quality of life of older people in care homes of an increase of the personal allowance to £40 per week. The PEA was set many years ago at a level that was felt to be appropriate. Since then PEA has been increased annually in line with average earnings. The PEA is provided for care home residents to have money to spend, as they wish, on small items for example on stationery or personal toiletries. It takes into account the fact that people in care homes generally have fewer personal expenses than those living in their own home. The PEA was increased to £20.45 per week on 9 April 2007.

Cervical Cancer: Vaccination

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether her Department plans to provide guidance on the use of human papilloma virus vaccines in its licence indications.

Caroline Flint: The Joint Committee for Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) has set up an human papilloma virus (HPV) subgroup to examine all safety, efficacy and cost issues relating to HPV vaccines. The subgroup is in the process of examining the evidence concerning the available HPV vaccines, including all the license indications. The sub group's advice will be reported to the main JCVI committee for further discussion. No decisions will be taken on introducing these vaccines into the immunisation programme until JCVI has presented its advice to Ministers for their consideration.

Coventry Teaching Primary Care Trust

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much funding Coventry Teaching Primary Care Trust received in each year since 1992.

Andy Burnham: Revenue allocations were first made to primary care trusts (PCTs) in 2003-04. Prior to this, funding was allocated to health authorities.
	The most recent round of revenue allocations, covering 2006-07 and 2007-08 was announced in February 2005. The table shows the revenue allocations made to Coventry Teaching PCT for this period
	
		
			  Coventry Teaching PCT  
			  Allocation (£ million)  
			 2006-07 425.2 
			 2007-08 469.5 
			  Two year increase  
			 £ million 89.0 
			 Percentage 23.4 
		
	
	The 2003-04 to 2005-06 revenue allocations to PCTs were announced in December 2002. The table shows the revenue allocations made to Coventry Teaching PCT for this period.
	
		
			  Coventry Teaching PCT  
			  Allocation (£ million)  
			 2003-04 289.9 
			 2004-05 318.4 
			 2005-06 348.0 
			  Three year increase  
			 £ million 82.3 
			 Percentage 31.0 
			  Notes: Comparisons between allocations rounds cannot be made for the following reasons:  Revenue allocations were made to health authorities for the period 2000-01 to 2002-03; Changes are made to the weighted capitation formula for each allocations round, therefore, comparisons would not be on a like for like basis; 2003-06 revenue allocations were made direct to PCTs, for the first time, and were on a three yearly basis;  2006-08 is the first year that Primary Medical Services (PMedS) were incorporated onto revenue allocations.

General Practitioners: Pay

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 19 February 2007,  Official Report, column 39W, when she plans to publish audited financial outturn data on the amount primary care trusts have spent on component two of the directed enhanced service for practice-based commissioning.

Andy Burnham: Final spend figures for component two of the practice-based commissioning directed enhanced service, based on audited annual accounts, will be available in summer 2007.

Health Appointments

Clive Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 24 January 2007,  Official Report, column 1883W, on health appointments, when the Chair of the Appointments Commission will write to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe.

Rosie Winterton: holding answer 5 April 2007
	 I understand that the Appointments Commission have now written to you in response to your earlier inquiry.

Health Services: Mothers

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the level of support offered to women with postnatal health problems.

Ivan Lewis: No assessment has been made of the adequacy of the level of support offered to women with postnatal mental health problems.
	The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) postnatal care guideline, published in July 2006, recommends a fully personalised plan for each woman, which takes into account her and her baby's individual needs. The guideline also places great importance on healthcare professionals taking into account the particular needs of individual families and on having the competencies required for each routine postnatal visit or appointment with the mother or baby, so that they can recognise any signs and symptoms of potentially life threatening conditions. It recommends that all maternity care providers (whether working in hospital or in primary care) should implement an externally evaluated structured programme that encourages breastfeeding. NICE also made recommendations in its recent guidance to improve services for women who experience mental health problems during or after pregnancy. We expect mental health services available for such women to improve as local services implement the Department's and the Institute's guidance in light of their assessment of local need.
	One of the key commissioning mechanisms of The Framework for Commissioning Health and Wellbeing which went out for consultation in March 2007, includes placing emphasis on the importance of primary care trust's and local authorities working together to develop practical and deliverable proposals for improving maternity services including the development of maternity, neonatal and perinatal mental health networks and Children's Trusts;
	Our framework document "Maternity Matters: Choice, access and continuity of care in a safe service" outlines our strategy to deliver and achieve our commitment to give women clinically appropriate choice over the maternity services they will receive. This was published on 3 April and it includes outlining the roles that service providers and commissioners will have in the provision of woman-focused, family-centred maternity services, incorporating the need to commission high quality, equitable, integrated maternity services as part of maternity, neonatal and perinatal mental health networks according to local need.

Hearing Aids: Waiting Lists

Alasdair McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the  (a) target and  (b) actual average waiting time is for people requiring a new digital hearing aid from the point of referral from GP to final fitting of the hearing aid in England.

Ivan Lewis: The most complex audiology cases will be covered by the target of treatment within 18 weeks of referral by December 2008, and the remaining routine adult hearing loss cases should be assessed within six weeks by March 2008, in line with the diagnostic waiting time milestone on which local commissioning plans are based. It is also good practice for the subsequent hearing aid fitting to be carried out soon after or at the same time as assessment.
	The information on actual average waiting time for people requiring a new digital hearing aid from the point of referral to general practitioner for final fitting is not held centrally. However, the median wait for audiology assessments is 23 weeks.
	The national audiology framework "Improving Access to Audiology Services in England", was published on 6 March 2007, and copies are available in the Library. It sets out clear guidance to the national health service on how to reduce waiting times and how to provide the additional 300,000 pathways that are needed in the run up to December 2008 to make a maximum wait of 18 weeks from referral to treatment possible for all audiology referrals. It aims to mitigate the risk to 18-week delivery and create a sustainable service model for audiology for the long term.

Hospices: Finance

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much funding her Department provided to  (a) children's and  (b) adults' hospices in each of the last five years for which figures are available; how much she expects to be spent in future years; and if she will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: This information is not available centrally. The level of funding a hospice receives is a matter for local negotiation between the local primary care trust, who are responsible for commissioning and funding palliative care services locally, and the hospice.
	The Government have delivered on its commitment to make an additional £50 million per annum available for specialist palliative care for adults. The money is now recurrent in PCT baseline allocations. In April 2007, we announced the allocation of £40 million capital funds for adults' hospices to improve their physical environments.
	In September 2006, a fund of up to £10 million was also announced to support Marie Curie Cancer Care's major capital modernisation programme of hospices in North London and Birmingham. The business case has been approved, although the final details have yet to be agreed.
	Voluntary sector children's hospices are receiving funding of £27 million between 2006-07 and 2008-09. They have already been given the first tranche of £9 million in 2006-07.

Hospitals: Leeds

Greg Mulholland: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what criteria were used to reach the recent decision to postpone the building of a Children's and Maternity hospital in Leeds; and whether she was directly consulted during the process leading up to the decision.

Ivan Lewis: The national health service in Leeds is committed to providing the highest quality services, including children's and maternity services, for the people it serves.
	No decision has been made on any part of the Making Leeds Better proposals. The entire health community remains committed to finding a workable solution to improve children's and maternity services in Leeds.
	Yorkshire and the Humber strategic health authority (SHA) has asked Leeds primary care trust (PCT) to review concerns about affordability and to examine all the options available for children's and maternity services in Leeds. The PCT will present a full project plan to the SHA at the end of April.

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 23 March 2007,  Official Report, column 1194W, on hospitals: waiting list, what assessment she has made of the statistical significance of the moderate correlation between the secondary sector clinical targets and service initial positions in 2003-04 and the age-needs index.

Andy Burnham: The distance between several secondary sector service targets and the service initial positions in March 2003-04 is moderately correlated to the age/needs index: the primary care trust health economies with low age/needs had modestly further to travel to achieve the targets. However, numerous parts of the country with low age/needs did not have far to travel in meeting these targets. The correlation is not a perfect one (with correlation co-efficients ranging from -0.28 in the case of distance to the accident and emergency four hour wait and age/needs to -0.13 in the case of distance to the out-patient booking targets and age/needs). The reasons behind the relationship are complex.
	Secondary sector under-performance in low age/needs areas is likely to have existed for some time prior to March 2003-04. By raising the quality of care to uniform national standards, the Government have significantly improved the services provided to patients in these areas.
	The age and need index, and the interactions between them, are currently being reviewed by independent academic researchers under the auspices of the Advisory Committee on Resource Allocation. A new age and need adjustment for weighted capitation may emerge from this research for resource allocation in 2008-09.

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting time was for  (a) in-patient,  (b) day cases and  (c) out-patient appointments at each hospital in London in (i) 1992, (ii) 1997, (iii) 2001, (iv) 2005 and (v) the most recent year for which figures are available.

Andy Burnham: The information requested can be found in the following table.
	
		
			  Table 1: Provider based median waiting time information, London NHS Trusts 
			  Median waiting time (weeks) month end 
			March 1992  March 1997 
			  Organisation code  Organisation  In-patient admission ordinary  In-patient admission daycase  Out-patient appointment  In-patient admission ordinary  In-patient admission daycase  Out-patient appointment 
			 RA1 Epsom Healthcare NHS Trust 8.4 7.8 n/a 16.6 10.7 3.3 
			 RAK Royal London Hospital and Associated Community Services NHS Trust 12.3 8.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAX Kingston Hospital NHS Trust 14.2 10.4 n/a 20.6 12.3 4.6 
			 RAZ St. Helier NHS Trust 15.3 10.8 n/a 17.2 9.6 3.6 
			 RAV The Guy's and Lewisham NHS Trust 15.3 10.9 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAP North Middlesex Hospital NHS Trust 15.6 9.9 n/a 25.0 11.8 7.5 
			 RAL Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust 17.5 16.1 n/a 15.2 9.8 5.8 
			 RAN Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust London) 18.2 12.6 n/a 11.6 9.2 12.3 
			 RAU Central Middlesex Hospital NHS Trust 23.6 8.3 n/a 17.8 9.1 6.7 
			 RAR Mount Vernon Hospital NHS Trust 25.2 23.7 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAS Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust 25.2 8.6 n/a 19.4 9.4 7.2 
			 RC3 Ealing Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 19.6 11.8 6.1 
			 RF4 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RFW West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 21.2 11.5 7.3 
			 RG2 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 16.4 9.7 5.9 
			 RG3 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 19.6 13.3 8.1 
			 RGC Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RGZ Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 22.5 10.9 8.4 
			 R31 Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a 19.3 15.7 7.2 
			 R32 Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 13.6 11.7 6.9 
			 RJ5 St. Mary's NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 19.5 10.6 6.9 
			 R36 Mayday Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 23.9 12.5 4.2 
			 RJ7 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 16.3 10.2 5.0 
			 RJZ King's College Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 19.4 20.4 5.9 
			 RKE Whittington Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 19.9 9.2 5.0 
			 RKL West London Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RNH Newham Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 13.1 8.9 7.1 
			 RNJ Barts and the London NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 17.5 10.4 7.5 
			 RNK Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 9.1 
			 RP4 Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 11.0 9.0 4.8 
			 RP6 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a 13.2 12.5 8.5 
			 RPY Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 2.6 
			 ROM Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a 9.8 8.5 3.8 
			 RON Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 23.S 21.S 4.5 
			 ROX Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a 9.4 8.1 4.5 
			 ROY SW London and St. George's NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 3.2 
			 RRV University College London NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a 14.5 11.3 5.1 
			 RT3 Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RV3 Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RV8 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RVL Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RVR Epsom and St. Helier NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RWK East London and The City Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RC5 Harefield Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 10.1 10.4 3.9 
			 RDC Wellhouse NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 21.2 11.3 6.5 
			 RDF Forest Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 22.5 17.5 9.3 
			 RFZ Northwick Park and St. Mark's NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 17.5 11.6 6.8 
			 RG4 Redbridge Health Care NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 22.5 20.1 3.9 
			 RG7 Havering Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 15.8 10.4 7.6 
			 RG9 Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 21.9 16.8 7.0 
			 RHG Richmond Twickenham and Roehampton Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 21.2 10.7 3.2 
			 RPX Royal Brompton Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 13.6 14.2 2.0 
			 R09 Bethlem and Maudsley NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 13.8 n/a 3.7 
			 RV5 South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
		
	
	
		
			  Median waiting time (weeks) month end 
			March 2001  March 2005 
			  Organisation code  Organisation  In-patient admission ordinary  In-patient admission daycase  Out-patient appointment  In-patient admission ordinary  In-patient admission daycase  Out-patient appointment 
			 RA1 Epsom Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAK Royal London Hospital and Associated Community Services NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAX Kingston Hospital NHS Trust 17.1 12.4 6.1 9.7 8.2 6.6 
			 RAZ St. Helier NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAV The Guy's and Lewisham NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAP North Middlesex Hospital NHS Trust 18.7 19.0 11.9 10.7 7.8 7.7 
			 RAL Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust 18.3 10.8 8.0 9.1 8.1 7.8 
			 RAN Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust London) 12.4 10.8 9.8 13.4 10.1 11.8 
			 RAU Central Middlesex Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAR Mount Vernon Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAS Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust 12.2 8.3 8.8 10.1 6.6 7.4 
			 RC3 Ealing Hospital NHS Trust 16.4 11.2 7.3 10.2 8.0 8.8 
			 RF4 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 12.4 8.6 9.0 
			 RFW West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust 26.5 9.8 5.0 13.1 7.9 6.1 
			 RG2 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust 15.8 9.7 7.2 11.7 6.4 5.8 
			 RG3 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust 18.3 17.3 6.3 12.0 8.4 7.1 
			 RGC Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 11.7 10.4 8.4 
			 RGZ Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust 24.7 14.3 9.1 11.0 9.6 8.0 
			 R31 Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust 19.7 16.6 10.5 10.1 7.4 8.4 
			 R32 Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust 21.8 9.3 7.3 7.9 8.7 7.6 
			 RJ5 St. Mary's NHS Trust 13.7 9.1 7.5 8.3 6.6 7.9 
			 R36 Mayday Healthcare NHS Trust 26.4 11.7 7.0 9.3 7.8 7.7 
			 RJ7 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust 18.2 9.5 7.7 10.6 7.4 6.5 
			 RJZ King's College Hospital NHS Trust 18.0 10.8 6.2 9.3 6.4 6.8 
			 RKE Whittington Hospital NHS Trust 11.4 9.0 5.7 7.0 5.5 6.4 
			 RKL West London Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 6.3 
			 RNH Newham Healthcare NHS Trust 15.1 9.3 7.6 9.9 6.6 6.9 
			 RNJ Barts and the London NHS Trust 18.2 10.5 9.9 8.0 5.6 8.9 
			 RNK Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a 8.5 n/a n/a 7.5 
			 RP4 Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust 12.5 10.9 9.0 7.5 6.7 5.9 
			 RP6 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 9.0 12.5 6.0 5.2 6.0 11.4 
			 RPY Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a 2.4 3.4 n/a 2.4 
			 ROM Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 11.9 10.5 5.9 9.2 9.0 5.7 
			 RON Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust 12.5 8.3 3.6 9.9 8.3 7.4 
			 ROX Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 7.8 7.4 6.6 4.0 3.9 4.4 
			 ROY SW London and St. George's NHS Trust n/a n/a 3.4 n/a n/a 3.2 
			 RRV University College London NHS Foundation Trust 11.9 8.4 6.9 8.6 7.2 6.5 
			 RT3 Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust 18.0 16.6 4.5 6.4 8.0 3.9 
			 RV3 Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a 5.9 n/a n/a 4.8 
			 RV8 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust 18.2 11.0 7.0 11.8 9.8 9.4 
			 RVL Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust 20.4 11.1 8.6 13.7 11.6 8.3 
			 RVR Epsom and St. Helier NHS Trust 18.8 11.6 6.6 12.6 6. 7.7 
			 RWK East London and The City Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a 5.1 n/a n/a 7.0 
			 RC5 Harefield Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RDC Wellhouse NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RDF Forest Healthcare NHS Trust 22.3 17.8 10.3 n/a n/a n/a 
			 RFZ Northwick Park and St. Mark's NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RG4 Redbridge Health Care NHS Trust 20.3 15.7 7.4 n/a n/a n/a 
			 RG7 Havering Hospitals NHS Trust 17.8 11.5 9.4 n/a n/a n/a 
			 RG9 Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RHG Richmond Twickenham and Roehampton Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RPX Royal Brompton Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 R09 Bethlem and Maudsley NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 RV5 South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust 9.5 n/a 3.3 n/a n/a n/a 
		
	
	
		
			  Median waiting time (weeks) month end 
			December 2006 
			  Organisation code  Organisation  In-patient admission ordinary  In-patient admission daycase  Out-patient appointment 
			 RA1 Epsom Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAK Royal London Hospital and Associated Community Services NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAX Kingston Hospital NHS Trust 6.8 8.7 4.7 
			 RAZ St. Helier NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAV The Guy's and Lewisham NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAP North Middlesex Hospital NHS Trust 10.7 10.6 5.6 
			 RAL Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust 8.6 6.9 5.8 
			 RAN Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust London) 8.4 8.5 8.7 
			 RAU Central Middlesex Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAR Mount Vernon Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RAS Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust 8.0 5.5 5.1 
			 RC3 Ealing Hospital NHS Trust 8.4 7.5 5.2 
			 RF4 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust 11.3 9.2 7.7 
			 RFW West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust 7.0 6.0 6.0 
			 RG2 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust 12.0 6.7 6.6 
			 RG3 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust 10.6 7.8 5.3 
			 RGC Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust 9.3 8.6 6.9 
			 RGZ Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust 10.5 8.5 4.0 
			 R31 Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust 8.5 6.9 8.1 
			 R32 Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust 9.4 8.7 6.8 
			 RJ5 St Mary's NHS Trust (1)5.5 (1)5.8 5.8 
			 R36 Mayday Healthcare NHS Trust 6.7 6.5 6.2 
			 RJ7 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust 8.3 6.4 4.8 
			 RJZ King's College Hospital NHS Trust 8.3 7.3 4.6 
			 RKE Whittington Hospital NHS Trust 9.0 7.0 4.6 
			 RKL West London Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a 4.6 
			 RNH Newham Healthcare NHS Trust 10.2 9.3 4.4 
			 RNJ Barts and the London NHS Trust 8.5 7.0 8.0 
			 RNK Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a 7.2 
			 RP4 Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust 7.8 6.9 4.7 
			 RP6 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust n/a 7.7 8.9 
			 RPY Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust 2.6 n/a 2.0 
			 ROM Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 9.2 8.7 6.0 
			 RON Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust 7.9 8.1 4.9 
			 ROX Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust 7.3 5.7 4.5 
			 ROY SW London and St. George's NHS Trust n/a n/a 2.6 
			 RRV University College London NHS Foundation Trust 8.9 7.3 4.9 
			 RT3 Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust 7.1 5.6 4.< 
			 RV3 Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a 5.1 
			 RV8 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust 9. 9.e 6.4 
			 RVL Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust 9.9 9.7 7.0 
			 RVR Epsom and St. Helier NHS Trust 8.8 7.0 5.4 
			 RWK East London and The City Mental Health NHS Trust n/a n/a 5.4 
			 RC5 Harefield Hospital NHS Trust n/c n/a n/a 
			 RDC Wellhouse NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RDF Forest Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RFZ Northwick Park and St Mark's NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RG4 Redbridge Health Care NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RG7 Havering Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RG9 Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RHG Richmond Twickenham and Roehampton Healthcare NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RPX Royal Brompton Hospital NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 R09 Bethlem and Maudsley NHS Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 RV5 South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust n/a n/a n/a 
			 (1) The September 2006 in-patient figures are used for St. Mary's NHS Trust due to pending revisions on the in-patient December 2006 data for this organisation.  Notes: 1. In-patient waiting time based on median wait of those still waiting at end of period. 2. Out-patient waiting times based on time waited for those seen during the quarter.  Source: Department of Health, KH07 and QM08s

Hospitals: Waiting Lists

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients in London waited for  (a) 18 months and over,  (b) 12 months and over and  (c) six months and over for out-patient admission in each quarter of each of the last five years in each primary care trust.

Andy Burnham: The information requested is not held centrally. The Department has not collected information on waits of over 26 weeks on out-patients since March 2004, as the current target is only 13 weeks. However, the following table shows how many patients waited over 26 weeks for out-patient admission in each London primary care trust (PCT) from 2002 to 2004.
	
		
			  Number waiting over 26 weeks for an out-patient appointment. June 2002 to March 2004, commissioner based 
			   Number waiting over 26 weeks, month end: 
			  Organisation  June 2002  September 2002  December 2002  March 2003  June 2003  September 2003  December 2003  March 2004 
			 Havering PCT 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Kingston PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Bromley PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Greenwich PCT 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 
			 Barnet PCT 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Hillingdon PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Bexley PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Enfield PCT 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Barking and Dagenham PCT 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 City and Hackney PCT 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Tower Hamlets PCT 24 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Newham PCT 70 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Haringey PCT 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Ealing PCT 25 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Hounslow PCT 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Brent PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Harrow PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Camden PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Islington PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Croydon PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Kensington and Chelsea PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Westminster PCT 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Lambeth PCT 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Southwark PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Lewisham PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Wandsworth PCT 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 
			 Richmond and Twickenham PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Sutton and Merton PCT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Walthamstow, Leyton and Leytonstone PC 30 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Chingford, Wanstead and Woodford PCT 39 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Redbridge PCT 36 0 0 0 n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 Redbridge PCT (new) n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 
			 Waltham Forest PCT n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 0 0 0 
			  Note: In the financial year 2003-04 Chingford, Wanstead and Woodford PCT divided, part joined Redbridge PCT, which kept its name (and is differentiated from the old PCT using the name Redbridge PCT (new)). The other part joined Walthamstow, Leyton and Leytonshire PCT to become Waltham Forest PCT.  Source: Department of Health, QMO8r

Injuries: Offensive Weapons

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many  (a) gun-shot and  (b) knife wound injuries were treated in hospitals in each of the last five years.

Andy Burnham: Information is not collected on the number of gun shot and knife wound injuries treated in hospitals.
	Information is available however on those patients who were actually admitted to hospital for gun shot and knife injuries (these figures do not include patients who were treated in accident and emergency departments for gun shot/knife injuries and not admitted). Those cause codes that appear relevant to the question are presented in the table as follows.
	
		
			  Count of finished admission episodes for gun shot and knife wound injuries 2001-02 to 2005-06, national health service hospitals, England 
			2005-06  2004-05  2003-04  2002-03  2001-02 
			 W32 Handgun discharge 44 38 68 68 68 
			 W33 Rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge 73 68 95 71 100 
			 X72 Intentional self-harm by handgun discharge 10 15 7 11 12 
			 X73 Intent self-harm by rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge 17 7 6 7 14 
			 X93 Assault by handgun discharge 44 37 49 47 42 
			 X94 Assault by rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge 51 51 50 56 64 
			 Y22 Handgun discharge undetermined intent 9 9 6 9 7 
			 Y23 Rifle shotgun and larger firearm discharge undetermined intent 11 7 19 17 17 
			  Total 259 232 300 286 324 
			
			 W26 Contact with knife sword or dagger 5,321 4,939 4,872 4,842 4,672 
			  Notes:  Finished admission episodes A finished admission episode is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. Please note that admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year.  Cause code The cause code is a supplementary code that indicates the nature of any external cause of injury, poisoning or other adverse effects.  Ungrossed data Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (i.e. the data are ungrossed).  Source:  Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Information Centre for health and social care.

Mentally Disturbed Offenders

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  what estimate she has made of the number of people suffering from  (a) personality disorder and  (b) dangerous and severe personality disorder;
	(2)  how many people are  (a) detained and  (b) receiving treatment for (i) personality disorder and (ii) dangerous severe personality disorder.

Rosie Winterton: holding answer 20 April 2007
	Personality disorders are common conditions, with a considerable variation in the severity and degree of distress and dysfunction caused. An independent study, "The Epidemiology of Personality Disorders" by Dr. Paul Moran in 2002 reported a prevalence rate of personality disorder amongst adults in the community of 10 to 13 per cent. However, this estimate is for all personality disorders and a separate prevalence rate for dangerous and severe personality disorder (DSPD) was not made in the Moran study.
	Approximately 250 to 300 people are being treated and supported in established specialist national health service personality disorder services, without any form of detention, and an additional 1300 people in new medium secure, community forensic and non-forensic pilot services. Of the latter, about 50 people at any one time will be undergoing in-patient assessment or treatment under sections of the Mental Health Act. There are 40 secure places within forensic mental health services for people with personality disorder who need treatment under detention. A further 400 male patients are detained on court orders under the legal category of psychopathic disorder in secure psychiatric hospitals.
	DSPD is not a clinical diagnosis but a description of a patient profile for those whose personality disorder is of an acuity or severity and risk to indicate they are likely to be the most serious threat to others. There are an estimated 2,000 to 2,500 individuals in the prison population who meet DSPD criteria. Although there is no existing research data on the number of people with DSPD in the community, further work has been commissioned to provide prospective data about the size of this group and is expected to be available later this year.
	DSPD pilot services are provided within Rampton and Broadmoor high secure hospitals and Her Majesty's Prisons at Whitemoor, Frankland and Low Newton. The current figures for those receiving assessment and treatment within these services is 66 in the national health service and 143 in the prison estate. All are detained, with a majority serving current prison sentences.

MRSA

Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what techniques and procedures are being used to combat MRSA in NHS hospitals; what use is being made of hydrogen peroxide; how widely it is being used for this purpose; and if she will make a statement.

Ivan Lewis: holding answer 23 April 2007
	As part of the Saving Lives programme, which is designed to support national health service trusts in reducing healthcare associated infections like meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), high impact interventions have been developed. The high impact interventions are simple evidence based tools. They reinforce the practical actions that clinical staff need to undertake every time for key procedures in order to significantly reduce healthcare associated infections including MRSA. They cover: Preventing the risk of microbial contamination (which includes hand hygiene, personal protective equipment, aseptic technique and safe disposal of sharps), Central venous catheter care, Peripheral line care, Renal dialysis catheter care, Preventing surgical site infection, Care of ventilated patients and Urinary catheter care.
	The Department also published enhanced advice on screening including decolonisation in November 2006.
	The Rapid Review Panel (RRP) have reviewed two hydrogen peroxide vapour products and recommended that both products have potential value and that in use trials are now needed. Trials have been undertaken within the national health service and these products have been utilised in outbreak situations.
	It is not known how widely hydrogen peroxide vapour is used within the NHS. The NHS does not collect data regarding the usage of products by individual trusts or collectively for the NHS. NHS trusts are free to choose which products to purchase and will maintain their own records.
	The Department is presently liaising with all of the bodies which play a role in the assessment of innovative products, about how the Department might best assist the take-up of products that have a favourable RRP recommendation. Discussions are at an early stage. Ultimately, they will include how innovative products are assessed for cost-effectiveness and their impact on services, thus creating a more streamlined process.

NHS: Finance

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been awarded by her Department under Our Health, Our Care, Our Communities since July 2006, broken down by  (a) strategic health authority and  (b) primary care trust; how many bids have been submitted; what the final period is for the submission of bids; and if she will make a statement.

Andy Burnham: Ten proposals were received in wave one. An announcement about four of these was made on the 21 December. Two of the schemes were withdrawn, one did not meet the criteria and we are resolving an outstanding query on one of the schemes. Two of the schemes were carried forward and announced with the second wave.
	The funding allocated to these four schemes totals £44.5 million, and the following chart breaks this down into strategic health authority (SHAs) and primary care trust (PCT) area, and the amount allocated to each scheme.
	
		
			  SHA  PCT  Amount awarded (£ million) 
			 North East Sunderland (Washington Primary care centre) 8.96 
			 South Central Hampshire (Gosport War Memorial Hospital) 6.122 
			 South West South Gloucestershire (Yate Community Health Centre) 5 
			 South West Somerset (West Somerset Healthy Living Park) 24.5 
			 Total  44.58 
		
	
	Decisions are still outstanding on the following schemes.
	
		
			  SHA  PCT  Amount requested (£ million) 
			  Outstanding from wave one   
			 East Midlands Lincolnshire (Stamford and Rutland Hospital) 0.5 
			
			  Outstanding from wave two   
			 North East Hartlepool (Primary care centre—Hartlepool) 7.25 
			 North East Berwick upon Tweed (Community Hospital Berwick) 24.701 
			 Yorkshire and Humber North East Lincolnshire (Primary care centre—Grimsby) 2.225 
			 Yorkshire and Humber North Yorkshire and York (New Community campus—Selby War Memorial Hospital) 3.65 
			 South West Peninsula Gloucestershire (New community services—Bourton and Moreton) 13.23 
			 South West Peninsula Gloucestershire (New facilities for community services—Berkley Vale) 6.46 
			 South West Peninsula Gloucestershire (Refurbishment—Cirencester Hospital) 0.25 
			 South West Peninsula Gloucestershire (Refurbishment—Stroud Hospital) 1.1 
			 South West Peninsula South Gloucestershire (Community Hospital—Kingswood) 16.99 
			 South West Peninsula Bath and North East Somerset (Community care centre—Keynsham) 6.51 
			 South West Peninsula North Somerset (Redevelopment—Clevedon Hospital) 15.13 
			 South West Peninsula Somerset (Redevelopment—South Petherton Hospital) 15.32 
			 South West Peninsula Wiltshire (Redevelopment Chippenham Hospital) 17.85 
			 South West Peninsula Wiltshire (Primary Care Centre—Salisbury) 32.92 
			 South West Peninsula Wiltshire (Primary Care Centre—Salisbury) 11.6 
			 South West Peninsula Bournemouth and Poole (Community hospital Boscombe) 7.17 
			 South West Peninsula Torbay (Redevelopment—Brixham Hospital) 10.34 
			 Total  193.20 
		
	
	Twenty-five schemes were submitted in wave two. We approved and announced details of 10 schemes, including two that were carried forward from wave one, on 11 April.
	The schemes announced on 11 April are listed in the following table.
	
		
			  SHA  PCT  Amount awarded (£ million) 
			 South Central Southampton City (Royal South Hampshire Hospital) 6.079 
			 East of England Suffolk (Felixstowe Community Hospitals) 1.76 
			 London Barking and Dagenham (Barking Hospital) 5 
			 London Richmond and Twickenham (New health and social care centre—Teddington Memorial Hospital) 3.98 
			 London Haringey (Hornsey Central Hospital) 1.6 
			 Yorkshire and Humber Calderdale and Kirklees (Redevelopment of Sites—Huddersfield) 12.91 
			 Yorkshire and Humber Rotherham (Primary care centre—Rotherham) 0.961 
			 East Midlands Nottinghamshire County (Redevelopment of Ashfield Hospital) 1.149 
			 South West Bristol (South Bristol Community Hospital) 3.9 
			 South East Coast Hastings and Rother (Station Plaza Primary Health Centre) 12 
			 Total  49.34

NHS: Finance

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she expects the group tasked with the review of general medical services funding to report on its findings and recommendations.

Andy Burnham: The report of the general medical services global sum formula review group which contains a number of recommendations on changes to the current formula is now available. The report is currently out for consultation until 11 May. A copy of the report has been placed in the Library.

NHS: Finance

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what  (a) total expenditure on enhanced services under the General Medical Services contract and  (b) total primary care trust enhanced services expenditure floor was expected to be in (i) 2005-06 and (ii) 2006-07; what actual expenditure on enhanced services was in 2005-06; and what expenditure on enhanced services she expects in 2006-07.

Andy Burnham: Total expenditure on enhanced services under the new general medical services contract (over the period 2004-05 to 2006-07) is estimated to be £2,067 million.
	In 2005-06, the total primary care trust (POT) enhanced services floor was £676 million. For 2006-07, it was agreed with the British Medical Association's General Practitioner Committee that enhanced services floors would be frozen at 2005-06 levels.
	The overall level of investment by PCTs in 2005-06 is £655 million (based on their audited annual accounts). Forecasts received from PCTs for 2006-07 indicates an overall spend on enhanced services of £824 million.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she plans to launch the £50 million advertising campaign to tackle sexually-transmitted infections announced on 26 November 2004.

Caroline Flint: The Department's new adult sexual health campaign, "Condom Essential Wear" was launched in November 2006. Approximately £6 million was spent on the campaign in the last financial year on a combination of TV, cinema, radio, press and digital advertising backed by extensive public relations, partnership marketing and the creation of two bespoke websites.
	Funding for the campaign, which targets some of the hardest to reach young people who are at risk of contracting a sexually transmitted infection, has been agreed at £4 million for the financial year 2007-08. It is too early to say what the funding levels will be for 2008-09.

Secondary Schools: Parental Choice

Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what initiatives his Department is pursuing to increase parental choice of secondary schools.

Jim Knight: The Government are committed to creating a real choice of excellent schools for parents. We have placed new duties on local authorities to plan school with a view to increasing parental choice and to respond to parents. We have created opportunities for new providers to set up schools through competitions. We have introduced a fairer admissions system, with help for parents to exercise their choices. And we have extended parents' rights to free school transport.

Framework for Excellence

Kelvin Hopkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps the Learning and Skills Council plans to take to reflect the different roles and objectives of further education and sixth form colleges when aggregating performance measures into a single star rating as proposed under the framework for excellence.

Bill Rammell: The Framework for Excellence arrangements will take account of the aims and missions of individual colleges and providers. The Learning and Skills Council will pilot the arrangements for the Framework fully during the academic year 2007/08, including developing and testing the processes and criteria for deriving each institution's overall performance rating. The LSC will publish further details on the piloting arrangements in about two months time.

Secondary School Standards

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps his Department is taking to raise standards in secondary schools.

Jim Knight: We are investing over £1 billion in personalising learning by 2008.
	The Secondary National Strategy provides training and support for teachers, including resources and materials for intervention and personalised learning.
	As a result, the number of schools with less than 25 per cent. of pupils achieving five or more good GCSEs is down from 616 to 47 and 86,555 more students achieved that standard than in 1997.
	Reforms at 14-19 will improve vocational skills and will ensure that pupils leave school with functional skills in English, maths and ICT.

Dentistry: Admissions

Charles Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  in what month of the academic year students who are applying to read dentistry at university are required to submit their University and College Admissions Service applications; and what the average time was to inform such students of the outcome of their application in the latest period for which figures are available;
	(2)  what the maximum number of universities is to which students applying to read dentistry may apply; and whether that figure differs from other university courses;
	(3)  what impact the requirement for students applying to read dentistry at university to make a dental-specific University and College Admission Service application has on their prospects of being accepted on other university courses should they not be accepted onto a dentistry course.

Bill Rammell: The deadline for applications to dentistry is 15 October. Institutions are advised to contact UCAS by 31 March with their decisions, and the rejected by default date is 9 May.
	Applicants may make four course choices for dentistry. Medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine and veterinary science applications are all restricted to four choices with a deadline of 15 October. All other subjects have an advisory deadline of 15 January with up to six choices available. There are also separate arrangements for Oxford and Cambridge applications.
	In their original application the applicant makes six choices in total (only four of which can be in dentistry), the final two choices can be in any subject. Should all of the applicant's choices be unsuccessful, opportunities to apply for courses remain through UCAS Extra and through the clearing system in August.

Dentistry: Admissions

Charles Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what  (a) extra curricular and  (b) work experience activities are prerequisites for students who wish to apply for dentistry at university.

Bill Rammell: holding answer 25 April 2007
	The criteria used to assess applicants are a matter for individual universities.
	The guidance in the UCAS publication on "Progression to Medicine and Dentistry" advises that
	"Without doubt, admissions tutors for both medicine and dentistry look for strong academic ability, just to prove your ability to cope with straight science, plus clear evidence of a commitment to medicine or dentistry as a career (which can usually be demonstrated via work experience placements)."
	Within one of the case studies in this publication, work experience within a local dental practice is cited.

Education: EC Action

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the status is of discussions to establish an European Union-wide common school text book; and if he will make a statement.

Bill Rammell: No formal discussions have taken place at the level of the United Kingdom or the European Union with a view to establishing a European Union-wide common school textbook. The Department would oppose such a textbook, should it be formally proposed, as it is important part of schools' autonomy that they are able to decide which resources they use to reach their teaching objectives. Furthermore, the implementation of such an EU-level proposal would be entirely at the discretion of each member state, as there is very little European Community competence in the field of education and training.

English Language: Au Pairs

Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills in what circumstances a person living in the UK and working as an au pair from  (a) an EU and  (b) a non-EU state may qualify for full fee remission for English for Speakers of Other Languages fees; and for how long such a person needs to be resident in the UK before qualifying.

Phil Hope: Since 2001, people enrolling on Learning and Skills Council (LSC) supported English for Speakers of Other Languages courses have been entitled to automatic fee remission provided that they meet the LSC's eligibility criteria for publicly funded further education.
	Entry to a course by any learner will depend on an initial assessment which confirms that a Skills for Life ESOL course is the most appropriate way of meeting their learning needs. For au pairs, this is unlikely to be the case as Skills for Life ESOL courses are intended to meet the needs of the most disadvantaged learners in settled communities, not those who are temporarily in the UK possibly with the intention of learning English.
	However, if ESOL is appropriate, the following eligibility and fee arrangements apply:
	Under the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) Funding Guidance for 2006/07, the general rule for public funding of further education (FE) is that the learner should have been resident in the UK for three years. Citizens of European Union (EU) countries are also generally considered to be eligible, as long as they have lived in the European Economic Area (EEA) for three years. This three year residency requirement applies equally to UK citizens who have not been resident in the UK/EEA.
	However, there are already a number of exceptions to this rule that take account of exceptional circumstances, for example, newly arrived spouses do not have to wait the normal three-year period. Provided they are married to a UK resident with settled status they become eligible for FE provision once they have been resident in the UK for one year.
	These residency requirements reflect the Government's view that it is reasonable to expect a person to have established a relevant connection with the UK before being allowed to benefit from funding provided by UK taxpayers. These arrangements are longstanding and have generally proved to be a fair measure for determining fee status. The eligibility rules must be met by all adults seeking to qualify under the 'home' fees criteria, including UK nationals returning to this country from outside the EU.
	Although there is no change to the eligibility conditions set out above, changes announced to fee remission will apply to all eligible learners. From August 2007, there will be no automatic fee remission for ESOL courses. Learners who can afford to do so will be asked to make a contribution to the cost of learning at a rate of 37.5 per cent. of the course fee with the Government still paying the majority of the cost. Those who are on benefits or who can evidence very low incomes will be entitled to fee remission.

English Language: Greater London

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many people in each London borough he estimates are eligible for English for Speakers of Other Languages courses with full fee remittance.

Bill Rammell: holding answer 16 April 2007
	All learners eligible for support from the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) and enrolling on Skills for Life ESOL courses are currently entitled to automatic fee remission. Because entitlement is automatic, the LSC do not require evidence related to concessionary fees to be collected on their Individualised Learner Records. Consequently, it is not possible to use this information to calculate either those who would be entitled to full fee remission under current arrangements or to predict accurately for the future.
	However, some evidence has been gathered to help understand the number of people who will continue to be entitled to full fee remission from August 2007 when ESOL courses will no longer attract automatic fee remission and free tuition will only be available to priority groups, for example people who are unemployed or receiving income-based benefits.
	For example, South London Learning Partnership carried out a questionnaire with 12 providers covering 2,615 learners. Of these 35 per cent. are employed, of whom 89 per cent. have an income of 15,000 or below, and 51 per cent. are in receipt of benefits. Of the remainder, 19 per cent. thought they would be able to pay. On this evidence, the majority of learners seeking ESOL courses would be entitled to full fee remission.

Headteachers: Vacancies

Edward Leigh: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment he has made of the effect of the measures set out in the response to the Committee of Public Accounts' 59th Report of 2005-06 on the level of head teacher vacancies.

Jim Knight: Since 1997, head teacher vacancies have remained low and fairly stable. Provisional figures released today show a fall in the head teacher vacancy rate for the maintained sector from 0.8 per cent. in January 2006 to 0.6 per cent. in January 2007. However, we know that some types of schools such as church schools, schools in London and some small schools in rural areas find it harder to recruit senior staff than others.
	Regarding the specific work highlighted in our response to the PAC report, we have made progress on a number of fronts. On vacancy filling, we have provided an additional £10 million funding to the National College for School Leadership (NCSL) to extend their support to schools and local authorities on succession planning. NCSL are also strengthening work with governor organisations including advice on recruiting school leaders. We have further developed initiatives on bringing on new talent, including the Fast Track and Future Leader programmes. Revised professional standards for teachers, from September 2007, will provide all teachers with a clear, coherent and progressive set of career pathways and help them to prepare for leadership. More broadly, the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) study identified a number of issues affecting recruitment to leadership positions and we will be working with key stakeholders, including the social partners, to take forward these issues.

Higher Education: Scholarships

David Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what the total value was on income-assessed non-repayable student bursaries administered by the Student Loan Company on behalf of higher education institutions in each year since 2001;
	(2)  how many income-assessed non-repayable student bursaries were administered by the Student Loan Company on behalf of higher education institutions in each year since 2001.

Bill Rammell: The Student Loans Company (SLC) have offered a bursary payment and administration service on behalf of individual higher education institutions since academic year 2006/07. The value and number of bursaries administered by SLC to date are as follows;
	
		
			   Value/Number 
			 Value of 2006/07 bursaries paid to date by SLC on behalf HEIs(1 )(£ million) 44.672 
			 Number of 2006/07 bursaries paid to date by SLC on behalf HEIs(1) 75,523 
			 (1)( )Figures relate to HEIs in England and Northern Ireland are correct as at 11 April 2007 
		
	
	It should be noted that these figures only represent a part-academic year, and cover only those HEIs who have opted to use SLC's full bursary payment and administration service.
	The Office for Fair Access (OFFA) is responsible for the annual monitoring of access agreements from academic year 2006/07 and will report on the outcome in autumn/winter 2007.
	We are aware that following the introduction of access agreements in 2006, Higher Education Institutions have budgeted to spend in excess of £300 million on bursaries and scholarships benefiting students from low-income backgrounds and other underrepresented groups by 2010/11.

Outdoor Education: Greater London

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many  (a) secondary schools and  (b) secondary school pupils have participated in field visits and outdoor learning as a result of the London Challenge Residential Courses programme.

Jim Knight: 31,245 pupils from 295 London secondary schools have participated—or will shortly be participating in—a range of residential courses that have been funded by the London Challenge programme.

Personal Social and Health Education: UK Membership of EC

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if he will place in the Library the guidance provided by his Department to schools on the Key Stage 4 scheme of work for citizenship in sections entitled  (a) How am I part of Europe?,  (b) Euro versus pound and  (c) Debate on the Euro.

Jim Knight: The Department has not issued additional guidance to that which is contained within the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QC) Key Stage 4 scheme of work.
	Schools are not obliged to follow the QCA schemes of work. These are offered as exemplars and can be adopted or adapted as schools decide.

Pupil Referral Units

David Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much the Government has spent on pupils in pupil referral units with  (a) unstatemented special educational needs,  (b) statemented special educational needs and  (c) special educational needs both statemented and unstatemented in each year from 1997 to 2006.

Jim Knight: The Department does not collect the information in the format requested. However, the following table provides details of the total planned expenditure on the provision of education at Pupil Referral Units and total expenditure on SEN pupils both statemented and unstatemented as it is not possible to extract this information. Comparable data are not available prior to 2000-01.
	
		
			  Budgeted net expenditure by local authorities on the provision of education for children with special educational needs( 1,2 ) and budgeted net expenditure by local authorities on the provision of education for children at Pupil Referral Units( 3)  in England: 2000-01 to 2006-07 
			  £ 
			   Budgeted net expenditure by local authorities on the provision of education for children with special educational needs( 1,2)  Budgeted net expenditure by local authorities on the provision of education at Pupil Referral Units( 3) 
			 2000-01 2,763,226,000 100,309,000 
			 2001-02 2,908,380,000 108,467,000 
			 2002-03 3,038,661,000 134,741,000 
			 2003-04 3,466,180,000 177,444,000 
			 2004-05 3,774,757,000 198,644,000 
			 2005-06 4,120,549,000 227,794,000 
			 2006-07 4,477,300,000 265,256,000 
			 (1) Includes planned expenditure on the provision for pupils with statements and the provision for non-statemented pupils with SEN, support for inclusion, inter authority recoupment, fees for pupils at independent special schools and abroad, educational psychology service, local authority functions in relation to child protection, therapies and other health related services, parent partnership, guidance and information, the monitoring of SEN provision and inclusion administration, assessment and co-ordination. Also included is the funding delegated to primary and secondary schools identified as "notional SEN" and the individual schools budget (ISB) for special schools. Does not include any planned expenditure on pupils with SEN attending Pupil Referral Units (PRUs). (2) The ISB for special schools will include some general education costs for pupils with SEN in addition to those costs specifically for SEN while the figures recorded against "notional SEN" are only indicative of the amount that might by spent by schools on SEN and, from 2004-05 onwards, "notional SEN" delegated to nursery schools was reported on section 52 for the first time (nursery schools "notional SEN" accounts for £7.8 million, £9.5 million and £10.3 million of the respective 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 totals). In 2005-06 and 2006-07, local authorities also budgeted £499.6 million and £528.5 million for SEN transport expenditure but this is not included in the above table as figures are not available prior to 2005-06. (3) Includes planned expenditure on the provision of education at Pupil Referral Units as defined in section 19 of the 1996 Act. In addition to the figures quoted above, Pupil Referral Units were also allocated School Standards Grants of £7.6 million in 2006-07.  Notes: 1. Figures are rounded to the nearest £1,000 and may not sum due to rounding. 2. The data are drawn from local authorities section 52 Budget Statements (tables 1 and 2) submitted to the DfES. Data are not available prior to 2000-01. 3. Cash terms figures as reported by local authorities as at 18 April 2007.

Schools: Buildings

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what guidance he has given schools on the use and suitability of temporary classrooms; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Knight: The Department's guidance encourages authorities and schools to fully consider and compare the costs and benefits of options for the provision of accommodation.
	Central Government capital support for investment in schools has increased from under £700 million in 1996-97 to £6.4 billion in 2007-08 and will rise further to £8.0 billion by 2010-11. Progress is being made year-by-year in improving the quality of the school building stock. Given the high levels of funding, authorities have the opportunity to replace temporary classrooms where they are considered to be unsuitable.
	
		
			  Table 1: number( 1)  of registered child care places for children under eight years of age in out of school day care—position at 31 March each year 
			  London boroughs  1997( 2)  2006( 2) 
			  Inner London   
			 City of London 70 200 
			 Camden n/a 1,700 
			 Hackney 1,110 2,000 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham n/a 1,000 
			 Haringey 200 1,700 
			 Islington 1,100 1,300 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 700 1,500 
			 Lambeth n/a 1,900 
			 Lewisham 1,000 2,200 
			 Newham 200 1,900 
			 Southwark 2,100 4,200 
			 Tower Hamlets n/a 1,400 
			 Wandsworth 1,000 3,600 
			 Westminster 700 1,100 
			
			  Outer London   
			 Barking and Dagenham 200 700 
			 Barnet 300 3,100 
			 Bexley 200 800 
			 Brent 300 1,300 
			 Bromley 300 2,400 
			 Croydon 700 3,700 
			 Ealing 500 2,100 
			 Enfield 300 1,800 
			 Greenwich 200 2,300 
			 Harrow 200 1,400 
			 Havering 300 1,100 
			 Hillingdon 100 1,100 
			 Hounslow 600 1,400 
			 Kingston upon Thames 300 1,300 
			 Merton 300 2,200 
			 Redbridge 200 1,300 
			 Richmond upon Thames 400 1,800 
			 Sutton 100 1,200 
			 Waltham Forest n/a 2,000 
			 n/a = Not available. (1) Figures have been rounded to the nearest 100 places. (2) Data source: Children's Day Care Facilities Survey. (3) Data source: Ofsted.

Schools: Buildings

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many children in  (a) secondary and  (b) primary schools were taught in temporary accommodation in each London borough in each year since 1997.

Jim Knight: Data showing numbers of temporary buildings have been received from local education authorities for three years since1997, but the data do not show numbers of pupils taught in those buildings.
	Central Government capital support for investment in schools has increased from under £700 million in 1996-97 to £6.4 billion in 2007-08 and will rise further to £8.0 billion by 2010-11. Progress is being made year-by-year in improving the quality of the school building stock. Given the high levels of funding, authorities have the opportunity to replace temporary classrooms where they are considered to be unsuitable.

Schools: Buildings

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much was spent on school buildings in each of the last 30 years at current prices.

Jim Knight: Expenditure on school buildings in England each year is determined by each local authority, using resources both from the Department for Education and Skills and other resources available locally. Accordingly, no central records are kept of expenditure at local authority level. Capital allocations for school buildings and associated capital infrastructure in each of the last 30 years are set out in the following table, in £ billion.
	These include ICT capital allocations and, from commencement in 1998-99, projects funded through PFI. Capital expenditure by local authorities will not necessarily be incurred in the year allocations are announced, due to timing differences.
	Allocation figures have been converted to current prices using the 2005-06 GDP deflator.
	
		
			   £ billion 
			 1977-78 1.4 
			 1978-79 1.3 
			 1979-80 1.0 
			 1980-81 1.1 
			 1981-82 0.8 
			 1982-83 0.7 
			 1983-84 0.7 
			 1984-85 0.7 
			 1985-86 0.7 
			 1986-87 0.7 
			 1987-88 0.6 
			 1988-89 0.8 
			 1989-90 0.7 
			 1990-91 0.8 
			 1991-92 0.9 
			 1992-93 1.0 
			 1993-94 0.8 
			 1994-95 0.8 
			 1995-96 0.6 
			 1996-97 0.7 
			 1997-98 0.9 
			 1998-99 1.1 
			 1999-2000 1.2 
			 2000-21 2.1 
			 2001-22 2.1 
			 2002-23 3.5 
			 2003-24 4.1 
			 2004-25 4.7 
			 2005-26 5.6 
			 2006-27 5.7

Secondary Education: Urban Areas

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment he has made of the merits of extending the London Challenge to other areas of England.

Jim Knight: On 4 April 2007, I announced the extension of the London Challenge in London for at least a further three years. I also announced the expansion of a similarly focused London Challenge type approach to two other parts of the country that face similar challenges to those which have afflicted the capital.
	My decision is based on an assessment of the proven success of the London Challenge programme. Today, more than half of London's pupils get five good GCSEs. London schools have outperformed the rest of the country for three years running and improvements have been seen in every London borough. Ofsted recently reinforced this assessment in their December report "Improvements in London Schools 2000-06". The report recommended considering the model
	"in other vulnerable areas where performance is a concern".

Special Educational Needs Learners

David Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the success rates for special educational needs learners are for complete frameworks of  (a) work-based learning,  (b) further education,  (c) adult and community learning and  (d) school sixth forms levels 1 to 3 vocational programmes in each year since 1997.

Parmjit Dhanda: Data on those assessed as having a special educational need (SEN) is not captured on the FE individualised learner record (ILR) databases that underpin the success rate figures produced by the Learning and Skills Council (LSC). However, learner self-assessment of whether they have learning difficulty, disability and/or health problem is recorded on the LSC's learner data for learners participating in work-based learning, further education and adult and community learning.
	In 2004/05 the national success rate for those learners in LSC funded FE provision with a self-declared learning difficulty, disability and/or health problem was 73 per cent. compared to 74 per cent. for those without. Comparable success rates for those in work-based learning or adult and community learning have not been calculated.
	The self-declared information captured on the ILR is very different from the SEN status attributed during compulsory education against a national legitimate and agreed framework, so an analysis using solely the LSC's learner data is deemed to be too inaccurate an approximation to provide a valid response to the question.
	Learner data for school sixth forms is currently not collected on the LSC's ILR, so success rates can not be calculated. However, Statisticians in the Department and the LSC are working to collect data which will enable the calculation of these success rates; a date for publication has not yet been agreed.

Teachers: Training

Anne Snelgrove: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans he has to increase funding for the training of designated teachers over the next three years.

Jim Knight: "Care Matters", published in October 2006, set out a range of measures to improve the lives of children in care. Of central importance is improving their education so that we give children in care the best possible chance in life. We propose to put the role of designated teacher on a statutory footing to ensure that all schools have a member of staff responsible for planning and coordinating support for the education of young people in care.
	The Department for Education and Skills Comprehensive Spending Review settlement gives us an overall spending envelope for 2008-11 which will enable us to deliver our key priorities for children, young people and learners. Decisions to be taken over the coming months will allow us to make more precise announcements about the allocation of resources towards the summer. A forthcoming White Paper will set out how we will take forward measures to improve the education of children in care.

Textbooks: Visually Impaired

Andrew Pelling: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps he is taking to  (a) increase the proportion of (i) mathematics and science GCSE textbooks and (ii) English textbooks available in large print or Braille and  (b) to make available versions of Key Stage 4 dictionaries and atlases accessible to those with a visual impairment.

Parmjit Dhanda: Part 4 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 requires schools and local authorities to plan to improve access to the curriculum and written materials for disabled pupils over time. This includes all National Curriculum taught subjects.
	With regard to the availability of text books and materials in electronic and other formats for schools, I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 19 March 2007,  Official Report, column 721W, to my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Lyn Brown).

Truancy

Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many children were  (a) stopped and  (b) cautioned for truancy in (i) Taunton Deane, (ii) Somerset and (iii) England in each year since 1997.

Jim Knight: Figures from the twice yearly nationally co-ordinated truancy sweeps that the Department ran until autumn 2006 show:
	
		
			  Number of pupils stopped 
			   Somerset  England 
			 Autumn 2002 95 20,554 
			 Spring 2003 109 14,375 
			 Autumn 2003 69 17,718 
			 Spring 2004 39 11,365 
			 Autumn 2004 126 14,958 
			 Spring 2005 70 12,808 
			 Autumn 2005 80 12,056 
			 Spring 2006 26 10,196 
			 Autumn 2006 94 11,713 
		
	
	
		
			  Number of pupils stopped without good reason for being out of school 
			   Somerset  England 
			 Autumn 2002 21 7,341 
			 Spring 2003 45 5,812 
			 Autumn 2003 0 7,189 
			 Spring 2004 15 5,088 
			 Autumn 2004 54 5,915 
			 Spring 2005 10 5,639 
			 Autumn 2005 42 4,965 
			 Spring 2006 20 4,589 
			 Autumn 2006 72 4,840 
		
	
	Local authorities run sweeps at other times in response to local intelligence but the Department does not collect statistics from these sweeps. The Department does not collect statistics for either Wales or district councils.

Customs Officers: Manpower

Mark Williams: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many customs officers are employed at UK ports; and how many are expected to be employed at UK ports in each of the next five years.

John Healey: Staff engaged on frontline operational activity at the frontier operate in a mobile, flexible and intelligence led manner. They are not, in the main, allocated to particular ports and their duties may involve them working at ports, airports or inland locations.
	Some 4500 staff from the HMRC's Detection directorate are employed on frontline operational duties at ports and airports. Other HMRC staff also attend ports and airports as part of their official duties.
	HMRC plans to maintain the number of frontline staff employed at UK borders in 2007-08 but no firm figures are yet available either for this year or beyond.

Departments: Art Works

Mark Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what pieces of artwork valued at over £1,000 have been  (a) purchased and  (b) transferred to his Department's ownership since July 2006; and what the (i) name and (ii) value is of each.

John Healey: There have been no pieces of artwork purchased by, or transferred to HM Treasury since July 2006.

EC Budget

John Hayes: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate he has made of the amount of pre-financing made, as project advances, under the latest European Union budget that is due for recovery; what the UK's share is of that funding; and what percentage was reclaimed on such funding from last year's budget.

Edward Balls: HM Treasury does not make estimates for pre-financing. The amounts of pre-financing are recorded in the annual accounts of the European Communities, which are then reported on by the European Court of Auditors.
	The latest figures available for pre-financing and recovery orders are for the 2005 financial year and may be found in the 'Final Annual Accounts of the European Communities 2005' -
	http://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/publications/fin_manag_account/fin_annual_ acc_2005_en.pdf

EC Budget: Rebate

Bob Spink: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much of the agreed rebate to be returned to the EU has been paid; and what the time scale is for future payments.

Edward Balls: None, as agreed at the December 2005 European Council, expenditure on economic development in the new member states will gradually be disapplied from the United Kingdom abatement calculation, from 2009. The following formula will be used for this purpose:
	
		
			   Percentage 
			 2009 20 
			 2010 70 
			 2011(1) 100 
			 (1) Onwards.

National Insurance Contributions

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what percentage employers' national insurance contributions form of the UK labour cost.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	  Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 26 April 21007:
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent parliamentary question asking the percentage that employers' national insurance contributions form of the UK labour cost. (133588)
	Estimates of the various components of labour costs are provided by the ONS in its labour costs survey (LCS). LCS estimates are compiled every four years based on information from the annual survey of hours and earnings, labour force survey, annual business inquiry and other data sources. The most recent results were compiled for 2004 and cover sectors C-O of the UK standard industrial classification of economic activities 2003 and businesses with 10 or more employees. The 2004 LCS shows that the proportion of UK labour costs attributable to employers' national insurance contributions is 6.2 per cent.

Oral Questions

Bob Russell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many questions tabled by hon. and right hon. Members to his Department for oral answer have been transferred to other Departments since May 2005.

John Healey: Treasury Ministers answer all questions concerning matters for which we are responsible. Only questions which it would be more appropriate for other Ministers to answer are transferred to other Departments.
	Since May 2005, six of the 400 questions tabled to the Treasury for oral answer have been transferred to other Departments.

Planning Gain Supplement

Mark Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been spent on preparations for the introduction of the Planning Gain Supplement.

John Healey: The Treasury, HM Revenue and Customs, and Communities and Local Government have undertaken preliminary work to develop and explore the feasibility of a Planning Gain Supplement since 2004. This has included the publication of one consultation document alongside the 2005 pre-Budget report and three consultation documents alongside the 2006 pre-Budget report. The costs incurred have been borne by the respective Departments as part of the normal policy development process.

Public Sector: Land

John Battle: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what consideration he has given to whether social and community benefits should carry equal weight in the sale of public sector land as achieving the best price.

John Healey: In general, the Government are always interested in securing the greatest value for money for the Taxpayer. Government Accounting's General Principles (24.2.1) exhorts:
	"Once surplus assets have been identified, they should be disposed of as quickly as possible subject to value for money considerations."
	Value for money bears on nearly all aspects of deployment of public resources: procurement, asset management, disposals, administrative systems and financing arrangements such as leases and PFI transactions. It means finding solutions which achieve the best mix of quality and effectiveness for the least outlay.
	However, all aspects of a transaction or proposed transaction, financial or otherwise, should be first taken fully into account; comprising any potential auxiliary or tangential benefit, including possible social and community benefits that may be attendant upon the issue, before the terms of a disposal, or other physical conveyance, is concluded.
	The Surplus Public Sector Land Taskforce was set up as part of the Government's response to the Barker Review of Housing Supply to examine cost-effective options for accelerating the release of public sector land in order to increase housing supply.
	Specifically with regard to local authority disposals, the Government's policy is that local authorities and other public bodies should dispose of surplus land wherever possible. Generally it is expected that land should be sold for the best consideration reasonably obtainable. But it is recognised that there are circumstances where a local authority may consider it appropriate to dispose of land at an undervalue.
	The General Disposal Consent issued in August 2003 in ODPM Circular 06/2003 enables local authorities to make land disposals which will contribute to the promotion or improvement of the economic, social or environmental well-being of an area at less than best consideration.

Revenue and Customs: Glasgow

Vincent Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  if he will make a statement on the backlog at the Inland Revenue office in Glasgow;
	(2)  whether people applying to the Inland Revenue office in Glasgow to reclaim a tax overpayment are compensated for lost interest due to the backlog; and if he will make a statement.

John Healey: Centre 1, HMRC's main processing office in the Glasgow area, receives large volumes of customer correspondence so there is inevitably work in progress at any time. There are no significant backlogs of work at Centre 1.
	There are statutory provisions for making a repayment "supplement" in addition to a tax repayment in certain circumstances. HMRC's approach to compensation and redress is set out in their Code of Practice COP1 "Putting Things Right".

Smuggling

Mark Williams: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what resources HM Revenue and Customs plans to allocate for making seizures of prohibited and restricted items at UK ports in each of the next five years.

John Healey: Information is not available in the format requested as HM Revenue and Customs do not specifically allocate resources to making seizures of prohibited and restricted goods. HMRC resources allocated to anti-smuggling work are multi-functional and are deployed flexibly against priorities that are subject to change at any time.

Tax Allowances

Harry Cohen: To ask Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent assessment has been made of the appropriateness of tax breaks for  (a) operations based on debt and  (b) self-employment and sub-contracting which place those arrangements at an advantage over those for direct employment; and if he will make a statement.

Edward Balls: The Government monitors all aspects of the tax system on an ongoing basis and policy changes were announced in the recent Budget. In addition, on 8 March I announced a review of the current tax deductibility rules applying to the use. of shareholder debt where it replaces the equity element in highly leveraged deals in the light of market developments. The review aims to ensure that existing rules are working as intended, consistent with the Government's focus on ensuring that commercial decisions are taken on a level playing field, to maximise efficient working of the investment chain.

Unemployment

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the rate of youth unemployment was in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available, broken down by region; what the unemployment rate was for all age groups in each region in each year; and if he will make a statement.

John Healey: holding answer 23 April 2007
	The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	 Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 26 April 2007:
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking what has been the rate of youth unemployment in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available, broken down into regions and how these figures compare with the unemployment rate for all age groups. (133458)
	For the purpose of this Parliamentary Question, we have taken 'youth' to mean people aged 16-24 years. Estimates of unemployment rates for people aged 16 to 24 by region are not available. Table 1, attached, gives unemployment rates for people aged 16 to 24 for the United Kingdom, as well as unemployment rates for people 16 and over, broken down by region.
	This information is for the 3 months ending December each year from 1997 to 2006 (estimates for 1998 and 2000 are not available). The data are not seasonally adjusted.
	Estimates are taken from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). As with any sample survey, estimates from the LFS are subject to a margin of uncertainty.
	
		
			  Table 1: unemployment rates( 1)  by age and region of residence United Kingdom, not seasonally adjusted 
			  thousand 
			   16 to 24 
			  Three months ending December each year  United Kingdom  United Kingdom  North e ast  North  w est  Yorkshire and Humberside  East Midlands  West Midlands 
			 1997 12.7 6.3 8.0 6.7 6.8 5.0 6.1 
			 1998 13.1 6.0 (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— 
			 1999 11.9 5.6 7.8 5.8 5.8 5.2 6.5 
			 2000 11.8 5.1 (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— 
			 2001 11.9 5.0 6.6 5.1 4.9 4.4 5.4 
			 2002 11.8 5.0 6.9 4.7 4.8 4.6 5.5 
			 2003 11.4 4.8 6.1 4.5 4.8 4.2 5.6 
			 2004 12.1 4.6 6.3 4.5 4.5 4.0 4.6 
			 2005 13.6 5.0 6.4 4.7 5.4 4.4 5.2 
			 2006 13.8 5.4 6.4 5.2 6.0 5.5 6.5 
		
	
	
		
			  thousand 
			   16 and over 
			  Three months ending December each year  East  London  South east  South  w est  Wales  Scotland  Northern Ireland 
			 1997 5.2 9.2 4.3 5.0 6.8 6.9 8.7 
			 1998 (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— 
			 1999 4.1 7.0 3.9 4.0 7.1 6.7 6.6 
			 2000 (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— 
			 2001 3.8 7.3 3.3 3.5 5.9 6.4 5.8 
			 2002 3.9 6.6 3.9 3.9 5.1 5.9 5.5 
			 2003 3.3 7.0 3.7 3.0 4.9 5.5 6.2 
			 2004 3.6 7.2 3.4 3.3 4.3 5.4 4.6 
			 2005 4.4 7.4 4.1 4.0 5.0 4.9 4.5 
			 2006 4.3 7.9 4.2 3.8 5.2 4.9 4.2 
			 (1) Total unemployed as a percentage of all economically active persons in the relevant age group. (2) Data not available  Source: ONS labour Force Survey (LFS)

Unemployment: Young People

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many 18 to 24 year olds were  (a) employed and  (b) unemployed in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available, broken down by region; and if he will make a statement.

John Healey: holding answer 23 April 2007
	 The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	 Letter from Karen Dunnell, dated 26 April 2007:
	As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how many 18 to 24 year olds have been (a) employed and (b) unemployed, in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available, broken down into regions. (133459)
	Table 1 gives the numbers of people aged 18 to 24 in employment, broken down by region of residence.
	Table 2 gives numbers of unemployed people aged 18 to 24 in the United Kingdom. Comparable estimates for each region are not available.
	The tables provided are for the 3 months ending December each year from 1997 to 2006 (estimates for 1998 and 2000 are not available). The data are not seasonally adjusted.
	Estimates are taken from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). As with any sample survey, estimates from the LFS are subject to a margin of uncertainty.
	
		
			  Table 1: People aged 18 to 24 in employment by region of residence United Kingdom, not seasonally adjusted 
			  Thousand 
			  Three months ending December each year  United Kingdom  North East  North West  Yorkshire and Humberside  East Midlands  West Midlands 
			 1997 3,211 131 358 268 240 279 
			 1998 3,185 — — — — — 
			 1999 3,269 132 360 286 222 292 
			 2000 3,243 — — — — — 
			 2001 3,346 139 370 284 246 302 
			 2002 3,406 138 406 291 237 316 
			 2003 3,467 148 414 305 259 306 
			 2004 3,520 161 430 311 262 316 
			 2005 3,505 162 437 312 244 308 
			 2006 3,610 171 425 331 262 308 
		
	
	
		
			  Thousand 
			   East  London  South East  South West  Wales  Scotland  Northern Ireland 
			 1997 294 405 427 255 142 301 106 
			 1998 — — — — — — — 
			 1999 292 441 454 264 147 277 100 
			 2000 — — — — — — — 
			 2001 302 443 457 269 144 292 99 
			 2002 297 412 470 270 160 308 100 
			 2003 321 397 456 291 169 301 103 
			 2004 320 377 470 279 174 318 102 
			 2005 311 390 449 273 173 330 112 
			 2006 317 431 477 281 182 318 108 
			 '—'Data not available  Source: ONS labour Force Survey (LFS) 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2: Unemployed people aged 18 to 24—United Kingdom, not seasonally adjusted 
			  Three months ending December each year  T housand 
			 1997 419 
			 1998 421 
			 1999 374 
			 2000 369 
			 2001 391 
			 2002 373 
			 2003 364 
			 2004 410 
			 2005 459 
			 2006 488 
			  Source: ONS Labour Force Survey (LFS)

Welfare Tax Credits

Mark Todd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 28 March 2007,  Official Report, column 1593W, on welfare tax credits, what guidance has been given to those administering tax credits claims affected by the part of the manual referring to undisclosed partners.

Stephen Timms: Chapter 15 of the Claimant Compliance Manual provides guidance on how to deal with a case where HMRC discover that a claimant has not disclosed that they have a partner. The Claimant Compliance Manual is available on HMRC's website at www.hmrc.gov.uk. Compliance staff refer to that guidance where a case meets the criteria.